Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Tuesday, June 11, 2019

One appellate court judge was impressed enough Tuesday by the case brought by 21 children, some now adults, suing the U.S. government over climate change that he said it may show criminal neglect

Advertisement

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

Then prosecute the evil doers.

#1 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-06-11 11:55 AM | Reply

Obama judge, right?

#2 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 12:00 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

LOL sure ....

#3 | Posted by AndreaMackris at 2019-06-11 12:01 PM | Reply

Well....that's stupid.

#4 | Posted by MUSTANG at 2019-06-11 12:01 PM | Reply

- by the case brought by 21 children

POSTED BY MRSILENCEDOGOOD

Waiting for MrDoGood to call it 'pedo-rape', and "Trump's fantasy".

#5 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 12:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

This falls under the government's duty to provide for the general welfare of citizens as stated in the preamble of the constitution. We have to, at least, make an effort instead of taking the lazy way and just deny the whole issue.

#6 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-06-11 12:07 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

The criminalization of policy differences is a go-to tactic for today's Left.

#7 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 12:09 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Waiting for MrDoGood to call it 'pedo-rape', and "Trump's fantasy".

#5 | POSTED BY SHEEPLESCHISM

I wondered how the guys who defend rapists day in and day out would try to derail a thread about another topic.

Thanks for showing up.

#8 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2019-06-11 12:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

Why do so many young people think they have a right to a future?

#9 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-11 12:12 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

So I wonder if we told these kids that to combat climate change more we need to stop producing cell phone batteries if they would still be so active.

#10 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-06-11 12:22 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 5

Advertisement

Advertisement

- policy differences

There were good anti-science climate change deniers on both sides.

#11 | Posted by Corky at 2019-06-11 12:28 PM | Reply

"So I wonder if we told these kids that to combat climate change more we need to stop producing cell phone batteries if they would still be so active."

Those particular young people would be fine with that if that is what it would take. Would you be? I would be. A decent future for my children and grandchildren is much more important to me than any appliance or gadget.

#12 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-11 12:31 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 3

So I wonder if we told these kids that to combat climate change more we need to stop producing cell phone batteries if they would still be so active.

#10 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

I doubt if your hypothetical would be necessary to reverse climate change. But if so, they would probably be okay with it. The fix is not to completely eliminate emissions. The fix is to find responsible alternatives to negate those emissions.

I equally doubt that you'd be willing to give up anything, even if you were convinced it's a problem. Someday your grandchildren will wonder WTF you were thinking.

#13 | Posted by Whatsleft at 2019-06-11 12:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

The criminalization of policy differences is a go-to tactic for today's Left.

#7 | Posted by nullifidian

It's hardly "policy differences". Only an intentionally obtuse idiot would describe it that way.

#14 | Posted by jpw at 2019-06-11 12:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 9

"case brought by 21 children, some now adults, suing the U.S. government over climate change "

they succeeded, now watch all the DR losers seethe, anonymously, on the internet

the life losers come here and show their displeasure in someone else's success, by impotently pounding sand on some blog, because they have nothing else

that is poetic justice

#15 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-06-11 12:50 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 6

- by impotently pounding sand on some blog
#15 | POSTED BY CHIEFTUTMOSES

^impotently pounds sand

#16 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 12:53 PM | Reply

Obama judge, right?

#2 | Posted by nullifidian

Who knows?

In 39 minutes the polls on the Left Coast will close and put Obama over the top.
Suck it, Retardicans.
#568 | Posted by nullifidian

Florida for Obama!
Virginia for Obama!

Eat sh--, Republicans!
#673 | Posted by nullifidian


#17 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-11 12:54 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

"Only an intentionally obtuse idiot "

well, these kids went out a did something for themselves, vs. just whining about what others are doing/not doing

no wonder it enrages the usual suspects

#18 | Posted by ChiefTutMoses at 2019-06-11 12:55 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#17 | POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY

I live rent free in this moron's head.

#19 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 12:56 PM | Reply

Weaponizing children is another go-to tactic of today's Left.

#20 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 01:02 PM | Reply | Funny: 3 | Newsworthy 1

#20 How else are we to compete with all you crybabies on the right?

#21 | Posted by IndianaJones at 2019-06-11 01:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

I live rent free in this moron's head.

#19 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

That's a sure sign that you don't but rrrreeeaaaaallllllyyyyyyy wish you did.

#22 | Posted by MrSilenceDogood at 2019-06-11 01:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#2 Obama Judge, right.
Posted by nullifidian
Who knows?

In 39 minutes the polls on the Left Coast will close and put Obama over the top.
Suck it, Retardicans.
#568 | Posted by nullifidian

Florida for Obama!
Virginia for Obama!
Eat sh--, Republicans!
#673 | Posted by nullifidian

If that quote is an accurate pull, AU, you win the 'Drudge Retort Post of the Month' award for sure.

#17 | POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY

#23 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2019-06-11 01:12 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 4

I bet AmericanUnity is actually a nice guy.

#24 | Posted by dixvillenotch at 2019-06-11 01:13 PM | Reply

#7 | Posted by nullifidian
It's hardly "policy differences". Only an intentionally obtuse idiot would describe it that way.

#14 | POSTED BY JPW AT 2019-06-11 12:50 PM

WINNER!Winner, chicken dinner.

#25 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour at 2019-06-11 01:13 PM | Reply

Only an intentionally obtuse idiot would describe it that way.
#14 | Posted by jpw

Doesn't that pretty much describe most global warming deniers? Greenhouse Effect was traced to CO2 in 1823 (en.wikipedia.org). It's about time we did something about it.

"Much of the nation ignorantly embraces the benefits of engineering and technology while simultaneously rejecting basic science."
Kevin Fedarko The Emerald Mile

#26 | Posted by SomebodyElse at 2019-06-11 01:21 PM | Reply

Obama judge, right?
#2 | Posted by nullifidian

Who said there was no politics in the cou4rt system?

#27 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-06-11 01:22 PM | Reply

general welfare of citizens as stated in the preamble of the constitution.

#6 | Posted by lee_the_agent

Is that where it is found?

#28 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-06-11 01:23 PM | Reply

What a bunch of malarkey.

I especially liked this:

In Juliana vs. United States, Olson contends the government has worsened climate change by promoting the fossil-fuel industry, by allowing oil and gas development on public lands, by sharing in the revenues, by working interdependently with polluters, by being "so involved in private activity that it's constitutionally liable."

Never mind the fact that according to the graphic in this EPA link US greenhouse emissions in 2017 was roughly the same as it was in 1990:

www.epa.gov

Nulli was right. This is an attempt to criminalize policy differences.

#29 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 01:27 PM | Reply | Funny: 4 | Newsworthy 1

12 years until the end of the world. Also, 12 years until the Paris Accord would have stopped China and India from building more coal fired power plants.

US is only Paris Accord country to lower emissions, while China and India run the least pollution efficient economies in the world. US manufacturing is the cleanest in the world.

Only makes sense if the real goal is to transfer manufacturing overseas. Democrat schemes deny the role of science.

*yawn*

#30 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 01:29 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 4

I thought it was in Art 1 sec 8. You don't have a clue about the constitution, lee.

#31 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-06-11 01:31 PM | Reply

-US is only Paris Accord country to lower emissions, while China and India run the least pollution efficient economies in the world.

Newsworthy!

Blessed be the Fruit!

#32 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 01:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

From the linked article, the defense's argument:

Asked by Hurwitz what recourse people have if the executive and legislative branches fail to protect them from harm, Clark said they can vote the politicians out of office.

"The remedy, however painful it might be... is the political remedy of removing them from office," Clark said.

"Even if you would suffer all the damage before that can occur?" Hurwitz asked him.

"Yes, your honor, because that's the whole notion of the separation of powers. Each of the branches of government in our three-branch system have their own institutional competencies, and we have mechanisms to deal with executive malfeasance, executive misfeasance, but it's not for the judiciary to take over and make subsidiary the executive branch or the Congress."


This is a policy dispute that is to be settled at the ballot box in respect to the separation of powers. It's pathetic that the defense has to provide this judge such a rudimentary tutorial on Civics101.

Here is the giveaway:

The plaintiffs are asking Judge Aiken to force the U.S. government to develop a plan to transition the country's energy system off of fossil fuels.

That's not the role of the judiciary. That's never been the role of the judiciary. Danforth constantly snipes at me for voting Republican over Democrat, this is a big reason why.

#33 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 01:36 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

Who said there was no politics in the cou4rt system?

#27 | Posted by Sniper

Yes. Who did say that?

pol·​i·​tics | ˈpä-lə-ˌtiks

1. the art or science of government

The Law is created by Congress and interpreted by the Courts. Congress is obviously political.

But the courts systems are part of government, too, and part of the art of governing.

Courts exist to do justice, to guarantee liberty, to enhance social order, to resolve disputes, to maintain rule of law, to provide for equal protection, and to ensure due process of law. They exist so the equality of individuals and the government is reality rather than empty rhetoric.

#34 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 01:37 PM | Reply

How about more nuclear power?

It's not exorbitantly expensive and it doesn't produce greenhouse gases.

#35 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 01:38 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

"Weaponizing children is another go-to tactic of today's Left."

What an idiotic comment, children will have to live with the consequences of the decisions made by adults today. Unlike most Republican voters they are actually interested in issues that will affect their entire lives and want the politicians to know that ignoring global climate change will have dire consequences for them. Older people will live out our lives before the worst consequences make our lives unlivable but those who are young today will face those consequences for much of their lives.

#36 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-11 01:39 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"It's not exorbitantly expensive and it doesn't produce greenhouse gases."

When you come up with a viable disposal method for the fuel rods then let us know.

#37 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-11 01:40 PM | Reply

That's not the role of the judiciary. That's never been the role of the judiciary. Danforth constantly snipes at me for voting Republican over Democrat, this is a big reason why.

#33 | Posted by JeffJ

Some things to ask yourself.

Are the plaintiffs being equally protected? Is the rule of law being maintained by the government?

Is the social order threatened by the negligence of our government?

Is Justice being served?

If not then the courts definitely have the right to intervene.

#38 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 01:42 PM | Reply

Courts exist to do justice, to guarantee liberty, to enhance social order, to resolve disputes, to maintain rule of law, to provide for equal protection, and to ensure due process of law. They exist so the equality of individuals and the government is reality rather than empty rhetoric.
#34 | Posted by donnerboy

What does that have to do with global warming? How does that stop all the other countries from releasing pollution?

#39 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-06-11 01:42 PM | Reply

#38 The courts aren't convened to legislate.

#40 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 01:43 PM | Reply

Blessed be the Fruit!

#32 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Yes. Blessed be the Fruit.

#41 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 01:43 PM | Reply

"In 39 minutes the polls on the Left Coast will close and put Obama over the top.
Suck it, Retardicans.
#568 | Posted by nullifidian
Florida for Obama!
Virginia for Obama!
Eat sh--, Republicans!
#673 | Posted by nullifidian"

The question is who currently lives in the real, original Nullifidian's head. The transformation of this contributor can only be explained by subterfuge or mental illness.

#42 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2019-06-11 01:44 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

That's not the role of the judiciary. That's never been the role of the judiciary. Danforth constantly snipes at me for voting Republican over Democrat, this is a big reason why.
#33 | Posted by JeffJ

Do you mean the courts are not suppose to write law?

#43 | Posted by Sniper at 2019-06-11 01:44 PM | Reply

Obama judge, right?

#2 | Posted by nullifidian

You think a trump judge would give a crap about the future of the planet?

#44 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 01:47 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

#38 The courts aren't convened to legislate.

#40 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Our anti abortion, pro trump "progressive" is now here to argue against protecting the planet.

#45 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 01:47 PM | Reply

How about more nuclear power?

It's not exorbitantly expensive and it doesn't produce greenhouse gases.

#35 | Posted by JeffJ

Maybe go ask someone in fukushima about it.

#46 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 01:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#38 The courts aren't convened to legislate.

#40 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Very good comrade! But, very weak sauce.

Courts interpret the law and determine if someone is not following the law.

I believe they mentioned possible criminal neglect? Also, the possibility that the Government worsened climate change by promoting the fossil-fuel industry, by allowing oil and gas development on public lands, by sharing in the revenues, by working interdependently with polluters, by being "so involved in private activity that it's constitutionally liable."

The courts also implied that the government had violated her clients' Fifth Amendment rights to life, property, equal protection under the law, personal security and family autonomy. She cited precedent in Brown vs. Board of Education, the decision that struck down school segregation. Her young clients are being deprived of their rights not because of their race this time, she argued, but because of their youth.

So which part of that was legislating?

#47 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 01:49 PM | Reply

That's not the role of the judiciary. That's never been the role of the judiciary. Danforth constantly snipes at me for voting Republican over Democrat, this is a big reason why.

#33 | Posted by JeffJ

When your party has become unprecedented in it's behavior, other parts of the government must develop unprecedented responses.

#48 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 01:49 PM | Reply

Enacting tariffs on the big polluting countries would shift manufacturing to the greener economies.

Earth Saving Tariffs on China and the other filthy polluters could have started *yesterday* and could still start *tomorrow*.

It is criminal neglect for the children to not sue for the Trump Administration to immediately enact Tariffs on China.

#49 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 01:49 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Is the social order threatened by the negligence of our government?"

Of course it is. Global Warming is blamed for much of the instability of the ME and the increase in refugees. Crops are failing in many places which takes away traditional means of survival for millions in many parts of the world.

#50 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-11 01:50 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

#45 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Judges aren't appointed to make policy.

#51 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 01:51 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

When your party has become unprecedented in it's behavior, other parts of the government must develop unprecedented responses.

#48 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

...ergo, extra-constitutional

#52 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 01:53 PM | Reply

--Global Warming is blamed for...

...For just about everything including foot fungus and jock itch.

#53 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 01:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Still grasping I see.

#54 | Posted by MSgt at 2019-06-11 01:56 PM | Reply

--How about more nuclear power?

France gets 75% of its electricity from nuclear. Leftists say we should be more like France. Ok!

#55 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 01:57 PM | Reply

It is criminal neglect for the children to not sue for the Trump Administration to immediately enact Tariffs on China.
#49 | POSTED BY DIXVILLENOTCH

He's right, you know.

Democrats only care about platitudes, accords, black tie galas, Cher, big announcements that mean nothing.

#56 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 01:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Judges aren't appointed to make policy."

Citizens United.

#57 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-11 02:01 PM | Reply

I can't believe I have to correct Sniper. What is this world coming to? I'm beginning to lose faith in all that is right.

#31

The Preamble of the U.S. Constitution,

We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

#58 | Posted by lee_the_agent at 2019-06-11 02:03 PM | Reply

"Democrats only care about platitudes, accords, black tie galas, Cher, big announcements that mean nothing."

Did you see the fat guy visiting the British Royal Family last week? With his entorage of 1000 people, including his uninvited kids with their spouses?

#59 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-11 02:03 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You want to get the worst polluters to come to your Global Warming Gala ready to cut emissions? Tariffs are the answer.

#60 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 02:03 PM | Reply

Tariffs are the answer.

#60 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

Yay! More taxes on the poor! Or maybe you, like humpy, think China is paying those tariffs? So I suppose you are supporting more tax cuts for the rich, too?

So these kind of taxes on middle class Americans (consumers) are ok with you but carbon taxes (on corporate polluters) are not?

Weird.

#61 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 02:08 PM | Reply

Earth Saving Tariffs are sitting right there beneath your upturned noses. Tariff China and their greenhouse emissions will drop as production moves to more energy efficient economies such as our own. China's construction of coal fired power plants can be stopped *overnight*. While we're at it, we can demand that they cut their pollution of the oceans by about 1000% until they match our own low level.

Science and Economics all at once.

Think of the children.

We only have 12 years.

So sensible it *can't* be a Democrat policy.

#62 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 02:10 PM | Reply

When you come up with a viable disposal method for the fuel rods then let us know.

#37 | POSTED BY DANNI

How many decades has nuclear power been under use in this country already?

It would appear that has been figured out.

Are the plaintiffs being equally protected?

Yes.

Is the rule of law being maintained by the government?

Yes.

Is the social order threatened by the negligence of our government?

No.

Is Justice being served?

That's subjective. "Justice" is written into the laws and policies. Earl Warren was famous for saying in court, "Is it right?" Judges don't make that call. Their job is to call balls and strikes - to umpire. The rules of the game have been put in front of them by the Legislative branch.

By the logic used by the plaintiffs these children could just as easily sue the government over negligence over entitlement funding (SS+Medicare+Medicaid) since the financial burden for the funding shortfalls will disproportionately affect them - you know, equal protection and all that.

It's really sad the profound ignorance so many display toward our basic civic structures.
If not then the courts definitely have the right to intervene.

#63 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 02:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

"Judges aren't appointed to make policy."
Citizens United.

#57 | POSTED BY DANNI

What policy was enacted with that?

#64 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 02:11 PM | Reply

Yay! More taxes on the poor!

Donnerboy

No, Donnerboy. Taxes on the polluters!

#65 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 02:12 PM | Reply

"France, whose 59 reactors generate 80 percent of its electricity, has safely recycled nuclear fuel for decades. They turned to nuclear power in the 1970s to limit their dependence on foreign energy. And, from the beginning, they made recycling used fuel central to their program.

Upon its removal from French reactors, used fuel is packed in containers and safely shipped via train and road to a facility in La Hague. There, the energy producing uranium and plutonium are removed and separated from the other waste and made into new fuel that can be used again. The entire process adds about 6 percent in costs for the French.

Anti-nuclear fear mongering has proved baseless. The French have recycled fuel like this for 30 years without incident: no terrorist attack, no bad guys stealing uranium, no contribution toward nuclear weapons proliferaton, and o accidental explosions."

www.heritage.org

#66 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 02:15 PM | Reply | Funny: 3 | Newsworthy 2

It is criminally negligent to allow China to build 600 MORE coal fired plants to produce their power for the next century.

You going to make me look up an Al Gore quote about coal fired plants? I'll do it!

#67 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 02:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

"Weaponizing children is another go-to tactic of today's Left."

You dingbats must think we are awesomely coordinate and organized.

Looks to me like them there chillens "weaponized" themselves.

I, for one, knew basically nothing about this case until today. And I will bet that is probably true for approximately 98.3521% of us lefties.

#68 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 02:17 PM | Reply

I wonder if they will sue China, Pakistan and India?

Probably not. No money there.

#69 | Posted by boaz at 2019-06-11 02:18 PM | Reply

#58 | Posted by lee_the_agent

Promote the general welfare needs to be defined. Too many liberals are using this to mean someone has to pay for every need they have.

The general welfare isn't what you think it is.

#70 | Posted by boaz at 2019-06-11 02:21 PM | Reply

No, Donnerboy. Taxes on the polluters!

#65 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

brilliant!

see Carbon Offsets.

Carbon offsets, to refresh your memory, are financial contributions to projects that help reduce CO2 emissions in various industries, or encourage new sustainable energy projects in an effort to balance out any damage your carbon footprint does to the planet.

#71 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 02:22 PM | Reply

If not then the courts definitely have the right to intervene.

#63 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

That wasn't meant to be in the post. It was part of a c/p that got below the other text and I didn't see it until after I clicked 'publish'.

#72 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 02:22 PM | Reply

Judges aren't appointed to make policy.

#51 | Posted by SheepleSchism

And republicans are supposed to help legislate and govern the country.

You work with the government you have, not the government you want.

When repubs turned themselves into a roadblock for doing anything useful for the country, there are no other options than the courts.

But of course our fake progressive is more angry about finding ways around repub obstructionism than he is about repub obstructionism.

#73 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 02:25 PM | Reply

Here's a Gore quote from about 12 years ago. It's a doozy from and address to our comrades at the Clinton Global Initiative.

www.cnn.com

Speaking at the opening plenary session of the Clinton Global Initiative Annual Meeting in New York, Gore said: "If you're a young person looking at the future of this planet and looking at what is being done right now, and not done, I believe we have reached the stage where it is time for civil disobedience to prevent the construction of new coal plants that do not have carbon capture and sequestration."

We wasted 12 years, including the entire Obama Administration not tariffing the big polluters! The Paris Accord doesn't just allow the big, inefficient producers to grow unchecked; the Paris Accord subsidzes the growth of the inefficient producers. And it's not 600 new coal power plants coming online, its 1600 coal power plants currently planned in 62 countries.

For the sake of the children, it is criminally negligent not to tariff the living snot out of these heinous polluters.

#74 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 02:26 PM | Reply

see Carbon Offsets.

Right now they are voluntary. Know how to make them compulsary? Congress passes a bill and POTUS signs it into law. That's it. The judiciary has no role in that process.

Carbon offsets, to refresh your memory, are financial contributions to projects that help reduce CO2 emissions in various industries, or encourage new sustainable energy projects in an effort to balance out any damage your carbon footprint does to the planet.

#71 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY

That's actually kind of funny, when you think about it. Change a few words but keep the actions the same and you just described the practice of the Catholic Church selling indulgences during the Middle Ages.

#75 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 02:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Promote the general welfare needs to be defined. Too many liberals are using this to mean someone has to pay for every need they have.

The general welfare isn't what you think it is.

#70 | Posted by boaz

As if clean air and water are some luxury item.

Look at his pile of morons arguing against saving their own home, simply because liberals want to save it.

#76 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 02:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 4

#68 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY

Dix has owned you more than once in this very thread.

You should be forced to drive him around for the rest of the day.

#77 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 02:27 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

That's actually kind of funny, when you think about it. Change a few words but keep the actions the same and you just described the practice of the Catholic Church selling indulgences during the Middle Ages.

#75 | Posted by JeffJ

Yeah religous fairytales are the same thing as environmental protection. Great analogy moron.

#78 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 02:27 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The general welfare isn't what you think it is."

Does it include clean air and water, or not? I'd like to know exactly where you draw the line.

#79 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-11 02:28 PM | Reply

If you like carbon offsets that don't hit their target, you'll love tariffs that do.

#80 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 02:28 PM | Reply

... more angry about finding ways around repub obstructionism than he is about repub obstructionism.

#73 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Who's obstructing? and resisting?

Off the meds again?

#81 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 02:29 PM | Reply

#73 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Give me your PO Box and I'll mail you a copy of School House Rock.

You desperately need a rudimentary education of our civic processes.

Policy is ultimately decided at the ballot box.

Don't like GOP energy policy? Vote the bums out.

That's how it works.

Win elections. Period. Win elections.

#82 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 02:29 PM | Reply

Posted by Boaz

BTW, did you see where the guys you vote for in NC were trying to disenfranchise voters who look like you?
www.nytimes.com

#83 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-11 02:30 PM | Reply

You can build a coal fired power plant. But we'll bankrupt you.

*Tomorrow*

#84 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 02:30 PM | Reply

That's actually kind of funny, when you think about it. Change a few words but keep the actions the same and you just described the practice of the Catholic Church selling indulgences during the Middle Ages.
#75 | Posted by JeffJ
Yeah religous fairytales are the same thing as environmental protection. Great analogy moron.

#78 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

During the Middle Ages a person could pay the Catholic Church up-front for a reduced penance (or no penance) for committing a sin, even urinating on a statue of the Virgin Mary.

In the present day a person can pay Al Gore (yes, he at least at one time sold carbon offsets) up-front in order to virtue signal for committing the sin of an excessive carbon footprint.

It's virtually the same act.

#85 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 02:33 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

If there was an arsonist in your town setting fires to houses nightly and the local town council ordered the firemen to not put out the fires or the police to investigate the crimes, what should the remedy be? To wait years until you have an election for a new council or to go to court to have the court issue an immediate injunction to the local town council to make them do something?

#86 | Posted by truthhurts at 2019-06-11 02:35 PM | Reply

It is criminally negligent to allow China to build 600 MORE coal fired plants to produce their power for the next century.

#67 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

Allow? Since when do we control china? All we control is ourselves. Or we're supposed to. But polluters totally own the party you fervently support.

#87 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 02:35 PM | Reply

So these kind of taxes on middle class Americans (consumers) are ok with you but carbon taxes (on corporate polluters) are not?
Weird.
#61 | Posted by donnerboy

What's weird is you lefties bitching about criminal negligence while demanding ineffective policies.

Unleash the earth saving power of tariffs now!

#88 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 02:36 PM | Reply

"It is criminally negligent to allow China to build 600 MORE coal fired plants to produce their power for the next century."

They have to make so many because 30 minutes after building one you will need to build another somewhere else.

And Humpy stands ready to export our beautiful clean coal to power all those coal plants!

What the....? Are you trying to start a war on COAL like Obama? What the heck is going up here? (U.S. COAL PRODUCTION Up📈7.8% past year(thanks to humpy!). Down📉31.5% last 10 years(thanks Obama!). #EndingWarOnCoal)

So when did beautiful clean coal become a problem for you? Haven't you seen what's going on in Montana??? Look at those trains loaded up with clean coal -- beautiful clean coal. And those trains were empty just a few years ago (dang you Obama!!!). They were empty; they were dying. (Thanks Obama!!) Nobody's done what Humpy has done to bring coal back and to undo every environment regulation that ebil Obama ever created.

I am sure those Chinese plants will be only Big Beautiful Clean Coal plants.

#89 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 02:36 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

During the Middle Ages a person could pay the Catholic Church up-front for a reduced penance (or no penance) for committing a sin, even urinating on a statue of the Virgin Mary.
In the present day a person can pay Al Gore (yes, he at least at one time sold carbon offsets) up-front in order to virtue signal for committing the sin of an excessive carbon footprint.
It's virtually the same act.
#85 | Posted by JeffJ

one is an ill-defined act with non proven ramifications. The other is killing us.

Which is which?

Virtually the same, as in apples and orangutans

#90 | Posted by truthhurts at 2019-06-11 02:36 PM | Reply

"What policy was enacted with that?"

The policy that unlimited corporate money could buy our elections. The Global Climate change debate has been heavily tilted in favor of polluters because of it.

#91 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-11 02:36 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I equally doubt that you'd be willing to give up anything, even if you were convinced it's a problem. Someday your grandchildren will wonder WTF you were thinking.

#13 | POSTED BY WHATSLEFT AT 2019-06-11 12:47 PM | REPLY

I can almost guaranty my carbon foot print is smaller than yours. I have seen massive amounts of environmental and emmissions cleanups that started way before the climate change activists ever showed their faces. Cars with much lower emmissions are the norm, less plastic bags, higher efficency heating and cooling systems, all things that didn't come about because someone said the earth only has 12 years left (which I think Al Gore said around 20 years ago) Gets old when someone tells you you are the problem when they are doing so from the biggest polluter there is a 747. And don't tell me one of these kids would give up their cell phone if you told them that using it adds to the problem, cell phones are crack to them, take them away and they can't think on their own.

#92 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-06-11 02:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Look at his pile of morons arguing against saving their own home, simply because liberals want to save it.

#76 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

As per usual on this subject, the point flew right over your head.

You prefer a heavy-handed centrally-planned approach.

I prefer a regulated market-based approach.

So, who decides?

This is why we have elections. Don't like the results? Support better candidates. The court isn't some super-elector you run to when you don't get your way at the ballot box.

#93 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 02:37 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"What policy was enacted with that?"
The policy that unlimited corporate money could buy our elections...

#91 | POSTED BY DANNI

All CU did was strike down parts of a law that quite clearly violated the 1st Amendment right to free speech.

#94 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 02:39 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Carbon offsets, to refresh your memory, are financial contributions to projects that help reduce CO2 emissions in various industries, or encourage new sustainable energy projects in an effort to balance out any damage your carbon footprint does to the planet.
#71 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY
That's actually kind of funny, when you think about it. Change a few words but keep the actions the same and you just described the practice of the Catholic Church selling indulgences during the Middle Ages.
#75 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Except Carbon Offsets actually work. They literally cover the output of greenhouse gases.

I don't think Indulgences were quite as effective...

#95 | Posted by Sycophant at 2019-06-11 02:39 PM | Reply

During the Middle Ages a person could pay the Catholic Church up-front for a reduced penance (or no penance) for committing a sin, even urinating on a statue of the Virgin Mary.

In the present day a person can pay Al Gore (yes, he at least at one time sold carbon offsets) up-front in order to virtue signal for committing the sin of an excessive carbon footprint.

It's virtually the same act.

#85 | Posted by JeffJ

You say a religious fairytale is virtual the same thing as a real scientific threat.

You're getting dumber by the day. All the pretzels you have to twist yourself into to defend repubs and attack dems has done obvious cumulative damage.

#96 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 02:39 PM | Reply

Do you ------------- want to shut down polluters to save the earth or not?

#97 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 02:39 PM | Reply

I prefer a regulated market-based approach.

#93 | Posted by JeffJ

No you don't. You favor the repub approach of doing NOTHING. You've been arguing on this site for years that it's too expensive to do ANYTHING and that a solution has to be PERFECT and GUARANTEED to TOTALLY fix the problem before it's worth pursuing.

#98 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 02:41 PM | Reply

This will be denied, for the reasons Jeff cited, as well as the Constitutional questions the judge brought up.

"these children could just as easily sue the government over negligence over entitlement funding (SS+Medicare+Medicaid) since the financial burden for the funding shortfalls will disproportionately affect them - you know, equal protection and all that."

Serious question: since that issue is true, and the legislative branches and executive branches have historically failed ALL of us in that manner...where would you suggest young folks turn? The legislative branch, supposedly the place for the fix, has been the center of the malfeasance. No matter whom we elect, the ditch keeps getting deeper.

Or look at your Constitutional question: HAVE WE given equal protection to the folks we know will bear the brunt, based on the equation?

#99 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-11 02:42 PM | Reply

Do you ------------- want to shut down polluters to save the earth or not?

#97 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

If you actually cared about the earth, you wouldnt be a diehard republican. So spare us the act.

#100 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 02:42 PM | Reply

cell phones are crack to them, take them away and they can't think on their own.

#92 | Posted by fishpaw

So it's like fox news for you.

#101 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 02:43 PM | Reply

"the 1st Amendment right to free speech."

How is that not paid speech?

#102 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-11 02:43 PM | Reply

Dude, its policy over politicians.

If the Democrats tariff heavily polluting nations to force them to match our own standards, support that.

Your support of Cap and Trade is criminally negligent. It will never produce the result you claim the Earth desperately needs, but it happens to be Dem policy.

#103 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 02:46 PM | Reply

It is criminally negligent to allow China to build 600 MORE coal fired plants to produce their power for the next century.
#67 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

Allow? Since when do we control china? All we control is ourselves. Or we're supposed to. But polluters totally own the party you fervently support.
#87 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

We completely control the terms on which we trade with China.

#104 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 02:49 PM | Reply

Why are all you lefties afraid to rein in the world's worst polluters?

#105 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 02:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I can almost guaranty my carbon foot print is smaller than yours. I have seen massive amounts of environmental and emmissions cleanups that started way before the climate change activists ever showed their faces. Cars with much lower emmissions are the norm, less plastic bags, higher efficency heating and cooling systems, all things that didn't come about because someone said the earth only has 12 years left (which I think Al Gore said around 20 years ago) Gets old when someone tells you you are the problem when they are doing so from the biggest polluter there is a 747. And don't tell me one of these kids would give up their cell phone if you told them that using it adds to the problem, cell phones are crack to them, take them away and they can't think on their own.

#92 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

Damn, lies, deflections, and a whopping "it's not my fault."

First, Gore never said that.

Second, cell phones really have nothing to do with Climate Change. It's there production which is the issue. Buying a new cell phone every year is a big contributor. But that can be offset with recycling the materials, technology, and additional planting of forests.

Third, it's cute to say these kids are just like everyone else including you: all talk, no follow through. But I think they'd hold on to their cell phones longer to help.

But the real problem IS people like you. Yes, you cause less of a problem than a 747. But there are 300 million of you. Not so many 747s. Worse, people like you refuse to vote anyone in who would force 747s to produce less CO2 emissions with technology or force the companies to buy offsets to make up for it.

So no, you really are the damn problem.

#106 | Posted by Sycophant at 2019-06-11 02:50 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

If you actually cared about the earth, you wouldnt be a diehard republican. So spare us the act.

#100 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2019-06-11 02:42 PM | FLAG:

Have you ever written a post where you actually offered a solution or thought? Every post you make is "you just don't care because you are a republican", "you don't know anything", "you just want to kill the children." Offer something constructive or some actual ideas on how you would solve the problem. Stop being the angry non thinking liberal all the time.

#107 | Posted by fishpaw at 2019-06-11 02:54 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Serious question: since that issue is true, and the legislative branches and executive branches have historically failed ALL of us in that manner...where would you suggest young folks turn? The legislative branch, supposedly the place for the fix, has been the center of the malfeasance. No matter whom we elect, the ditch keeps getting deeper.

That's a fair question. The problem, as I see it, is one of ignorance. Most people just don't know how bad the trajectory of our entitlements are if left unchecked. I SO badly wanted Obama to address this issue in a serious way when he was POTUS. He would have had a very influential and powerful ally in Paul Ryan on the GOP side and with the power of the bully pulpit and powerful support on the other side I think a 1986-esque arrangement could have been reached.

Or look at your Constitutional question: HAVE WE given equal protection to the folks we know will bear the brunt, based on the equation?

#99 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

We have in a sense that the remedy is there - win elections and said remedy applies equally to all.

I actually think the unfunded liability issue is much easier to prove than the MMGW issue is to prove. Who's to say that 10 years from now a radical energy breakthrough won't be discovered and that within 10 years after that the infrastructure is in place to begin transitioning? When it comes to technology there are too many unknowns to make the claim the the younger segment of our society will be more adversely affected than the older segments, especially with natural gas replacing coal and actually driving down emissions in this country. Further, as has been said above, how do we measure adverse effects? I ask that particularly from the standpoint of our government having no control over developing nations like China and India.

#108 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 02:54 PM | Reply

If you actually cared about the earth, you wouldnt be a diehard republican. So spare us the act.
#100 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY AT 2019-06-11 02:42 PM | FLAG:

Have you ever written a post where you actually offered a solution or thought?

#107 | POSTED BY FISHPAW

On this issue? No. On this, Speaks' posts are purely emotive; completely irrational.

#109 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 02:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

or force the companies to buy offsets to make up for it.
So no, you really are the damn problem.

#106 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT

LOL. buying offsets is alchemy.

#110 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 02:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"the 1st Amendment right to free speech."
How is that not paid speech?

#102 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

With the exception of standing on top of a soapbox on a street corner, just about any political speech is going to require money. Even printing flyers costs money. Street signs cost money.

#111 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 02:58 PM | Reply

But polluters totally own the party you fervently support.

#87 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

The Democrats are propping up the polluters. In real life and in this thread.

It's criminally negligent not to subsidize Chinese coal through the Paris Accord? We've got to mobilize on cars, aircraft, industry, every single building and cow in America like its WW Dos to save the Earth in 12 years. But China needn't do a thing?

It is you who are fervently supporting the polluters. You're wearing no clothes.

I see you.

LOL

#112 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 02:58 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"The court isn't some super-elector you run to when you don't get your way at the ballot box."

Unless your name is George W. Bush.

#113 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-11 02:59 PM | Reply

Have you ever written a post where you actually offered a solution or thought? Every post you make is "you just don't care because you are a republican", "you don't know anything", "you just want to kill the children." Offer something constructive or some actual ideas on how you would solve the problem. Stop being the angry non thinking liberal all the time.

#107 | Posted by fishpaw

I'm a solution seeker. In almost every problem facing america today, the first step is getting republicans out of power.

If you dont want to have your stupidity pointed out, stop being stupid and voting for the stupid party. Or at least stop whining about it. Maybe you need a safe space.

#114 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 02:59 PM | Reply

Obama judge, right?

#2 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN AT 2019-06-11 12:00 PM | FLAG: | NEWSWORTHY 2

How cute! He talks just like his Daddy.

#115 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-06-11 02:59 PM | Reply

The Democrats are propping up the polluters.
I see you.

LOL

#112 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

You see nothing.

Let's try this - who defends polluters MORE, democrats or republicans?

IQ test time...

#116 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:00 PM | Reply

On this issue? No. On this, Speaks' posts are purely emotive; completely irrational.

#109 | Posted by JeffJ

Yeah I'm so irrational. Remember when I equated carbon credits to tickets into heaven? I'm clearly an irrational moron.

#117 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:01 PM | Reply

Worse, people like you refuse to vote anyone in who would force...

#106 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT

That's how this should be framed. That is what I was driving at with #93.

#118 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 03:01 PM | Reply

"The general welfare isn't what you think it is."

Does it include clean air and water, or not? I'd like to know exactly where you draw the line.

Rightwingers like to pretend that clause doesn't exist. I've never seen an application of it they agreed with. Must be the word "welfare" that upsets them so much.

#119 | Posted by JOE at 2019-06-11 03:03 PM | Reply

I'm clearly an irrational moron.

#117 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

I didn't call you a moron, nor have I ever, that I recall.

I said you are irrational when it comes to this issue and that has been proven by a well-established patter on your part.

Just look at the excessive use of caps and the number of positions you've falsely assigned.

#120 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 03:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Let's try this - who defends polluters MORE, democrats or republicans?
IQ test time...

#116 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Dix is right. Unless China is held accountable, you're wasting time on lowering global pollution.

Nulli has said this numerous times as well. Tariffs are one way to move the manufacturing away from the polluters.

#121 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 03:05 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#116 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY
#120 | POSTED BY JEFFJ

Jeff's just trying to say in a nice way that you're acting like a nutter.

#122 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 03:06 PM | Reply

Hey, Speak. It's almost as if neither the Democrats nor the Republicans really want to curb pollution, but do want to sell American jobs overseas.

And then, there's Trump.

And you hate him.

Go figure.

#123 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 03:06 PM | Reply

Rightwingers like to pretend that clause doesn't exist. I've never seen an application of it they agreed with. Must be the word "welfare" that upsets them so much.

#119 | POSTED BY JOE

Here is the problem I have with how Progressives and some liberals apply the clause: It's a catch-all. Just about anything can be defined as "promote the general welfare". But when I read Article I, Section 8 I see a lot of narrowly-defined congressional powers. Jump to the 10th Amendment and it's clear that the Constitution doesn't enumerate limitless powers on the federal government under the 1-2 punch of the welfare clause and commerce clause.

#124 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 03:07 PM | Reply

Why are lefties lining up alongside the Chamber of Commerce these days?

Great stuff.

LOL

#125 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 03:08 PM | Reply

Jeff's just trying to say in a nice way that you're acting like a nutter.

#122 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Yeah I'm so nuts that I spend all day online saying it's not worth saving the planet.

Or am I so nuts that I DO want to save the planet, but I vote for republicans anyways?

#126 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:11 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Hey, Speak. It's almost as if neither the Democrats nor the Republicans really want to curb pollution, but do want to sell American jobs overseas.

And then, there's Trump.

And you hate him.

Go figure.

#123 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

Hey Dix, it's almost as if you're too stupid to tell which party is better for the environment.

If you need a hint I'd say it's not the one who put pollution lobbyists in charge of the EPA.

#127 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:12 PM | Reply

ere is the problem I have with how Progressives and some liberals apply the clause: It's a catch-all. Just about anything can be defined as "promote the general welfare".

#124 | Posted by JeffJ

I'm sure you have a big problem with that.

Meanwhile you have no problem with trump calling everything he wants "national security" so he can put a tariff on it or build a wall.

#128 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:13 PM | Reply

We're doing pretty well ourselves, Speak. That is, if you are actually American.

The politician that wants to tariff China and India until they clean up the environment is better for the environment.

That's the goal, right? Saving the Earth.

It is criminally negligent to focus on what the most energy efficient economy on the planet is doing while enabling the least energy efficient to continue to pillage the environment.

#129 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 03:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

Meanwhile you have no problem with trump calling everything he wants "national security" so he can put a tariff on it or build a wall.

#128 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

LOL

This, in a thread calling the policy of the cleanest nation on earth 'criminally negligent' because of *the children* while endorsing subsidies and low environmental standards for the worst polluters in the world.

Thanks for the laughs.

LOL

#130 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 03:20 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

--Why are lefties lining up alongside the Chamber of Commerce these days?

Just like with open borders. The Left went from anti-corporate globalization--the WTO meeting in Seattle,1999 was the high-water mark, to pro-corporate shills who love NAFTA, the Obama-Clinton TPP and the multinational scheme for a cheap-labor-friendly borderless world. The Left, left me.

#131 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 03:23 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You're wearing no clothes.
I see you.
LOL

#112 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

You see nothing.

#116 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

That's pretty funny, Sergeant Schulz.

I see a communist.

LOL

#132 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 03:24 PM | Reply

"The politician that wants to tariff China and India until they clean up the environment is better for the environment."

And that isn't Trump. He has never said that a cleaner environment is one of his goals, far from it. Tariffs might move some manufacturing to the U.S. but most likely it would just go to other countries like Vietnam. And those nations would do pretty much what China has done with even less attention to the environment.

#133 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-11 03:24 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Meanwhile you have no problem with trump calling everything he wants "national security" so he can put a tariff on it or build a wall.

#128 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Actually, if you Hans those threads you'll find that I spoke out against it.

The Emergency Powers Act is a bad law and I think it's unconstitutional.

It's certainly ripe for abuse, as in Trump's case.

I was consistent - if congress fails to provide funding for a wall - no wall.

That's how it works and that applies to this thread.

If congress (and POTUS by signing a bill into law) fails to craft the energy policies the plaintiffs want, then the plaintiffs don't get what they want.

#134 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 03:25 PM | Reply

Dix owns this thread. You guys should have to pay a toll just for the privilege of riding on his super highway.

#135 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 03:26 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Dix owns this thread. You guys should have to pay a toll just for the privilege of riding on his super highway.

#135 | Posted by SheepleSchism

And our resident fake progressive is of course licking the ---- of another trump cult member.

#136 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:29 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Trump has never said that a cleaner environment is one of his goals, far from it. Tariffs might move some manufacturing to the U.S. but most likely it would just go to other countries like Vietnam. And those nations would do pretty much what China has done with even less attention to the environment.

#133 | Posted by danni

Of course he has, Danni. You are willfully ignorant.

Tariff all the polluters until they clean up their environmental standards to meet our own.

Let's get results.

LOL

#137 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 03:29 PM | Reply

If congress (and POTUS by signing a bill into law) fails to craft the energy policies the plaintiffs want, then the plaintiffs don't get what they want.

#134 | Posted by JeffJ

It's not about what the plaintiffs want, it's about whether or not it is the government's responsibility to protect victims from sociopaths. PS it is.

#138 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:30 PM | Reply

The politician that wants to tariff China and India until they clean up the environment is better for the environment.

#129 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

Who exactly is that politician? Your cult leader? The one who put polluters in charge of the EPA?

#139 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:31 PM | Reply

Dix owns this thread. You guys should have to pay a toll just for the privilege of riding on his super highway.

#135 | Posted by SheepleSchism

WARNING: THERE ARE NO BRAKES ON THIS SUPER HIGHWAY

#140 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 03:31 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

There are enough tears on this thread to end the global drought.

#141 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 03:36 PM | Reply

It's not about what the plaintiffs want, it's about whether or not it is the government's responsibility to protect victims from sociopaths. PS it is.

#138 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

So, it's sociopathic to have an energy policy that differs from what the plaintiffs think it should be?

#142 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 03:37 PM | Reply

Who exactly is that politician?

#139 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

Again, follow the policy, not the politician.

Who is yours? Biden? Bernie? Hillary? Michelle?

Now that's funny.

#143 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 03:38 PM | Reply

WARNING: THERE ARE NO BRAKES ON THIS SUPER HIGHWAY

#140 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

WARNING: There are no brains in someone who thinks trump will help the planet.

www.vanityfair.com

over the course of the last 20 months, the government has:

Pulled out of the Paris Climate accord;
Planned to make it "significantly easier for energy companies to release methane into the atmosphere";
Unveiled a proposal to let coal-burning plants regulate themselves that would kill 1,400 Americans a year;
Signaled that it wants to make asbestos great again; and
Moved to gut Obama's fuel emissions rules.

#144 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:38 PM | Reply

So, it's sociopathic to have an energy policy that differs from what the plaintiffs think it should be?

#142 | Posted by JeffJ

It's sociopathic to bribe government to lower fuel economy standards, which kills people.

#145 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:39 PM | Reply

Again, follow the policy, not the politician.

#143 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

The policy is to put polluters in charge of the EPA dum dum.

#146 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:40 PM | Reply

There are enough tears on this thread to end the global drought.

#141 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Sheeps got nothing so he takes his usual option of whining about people who want to fix the problem being too emotional.

#147 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:41 PM | Reply

Posted by Boaz

BTW, did you see where the guys you vote for in NC were trying to disenfranchise voters who look like you?
www.nytimes.com

#83 | Posted by Danforth

Try your racist stuff on someone else. I dont need the Democrat Party to help me vote.

#148 | Posted by boaz at 2019-06-11 03:43 PM | Reply

the global drought.

#141 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Have you bothered to check if the Midwest is still under water?

Northern California is on flood watch throughout the summer.

Texas, Florida, Puerto Rico are *parched*.

I know, I know. Weather is not climate, right?

Great stuff, man. Great stuff.

LeeTheAgent could use some new stuff for his act. His 7 minute schtick is down to about 15 seconds.

LOL

#149 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 03:43 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Do you think the Russians will allow us to have clean air in this country?

Clearly they're not permitting it now.

#150 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2019-06-11 03:44 PM | Reply

#147 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

You're too emotional to understand who the polluters are. You refuse to even accept the facts.
As long as you can't SEE the pollution and slave labor that built your Tesla, You don't care.

You don't care about the humanitarian crisis on the southern border either. They're just human props for your political cause.
All you whine about is POWER. Political power is your only concern. The rest is just excuses for your party.

Dix is right about China and India. He's DEAD right. Spot on. You can't handle it.

#151 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 03:45 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

"Try your racist stuff on someone else."

Me? I was pointing out NC Republicans are trying their racist stuff on YOU.

"I dont need the Democrat Party to help me vote."

Well, the guys you vote for certainly don't want you to vote.

#152 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-11 03:46 PM | Reply

You guys see that Sheep's global drought is causing flooding in the Great Lakes:

www.bing.com

Science!

#153 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 03:47 PM | Reply

"I SO badly wanted Obama to address this issue in a serious way when he was POTUS...."

...that I voted for a Party who promised they'd address it by making it worse.

#154 | Posted by Danforth at 2019-06-11 03:49 PM | Reply

"Northern California is on flood watch throughout the summer."

Flood season is mostly over in California.

It's fire season in California now.

Do try and keep up.

#155 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 03:49 PM | Reply

Try your racist stuff on someone else. I dont need the Democrat Party to help me vote.

#148 | Posted by boaz

No you have passionate unquestioning support for the party that does everything it can think of to keep blacks from voting.

#156 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:50 PM | Reply

"Of course he has, Danni. You are willfully ignorant."

Then I'm sure you can supply a link where he says his tariffs are going to force China to clean up their environment.

#157 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-11 03:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Pulled out of the Paris Climate accord;
#144 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

What would signing it do, exactly? Details. please.

-Signaled that it wants to make asbestos great again;

True story. I work in a gov't facility. 4 years ago, during Obama admin, they hang up posters all over the building.

"Asbestos: How to live with it" HAHAHA. I thought it was funny. They're done removing it in federal facilities.

Now we just have to "learn to live with it" . Me and asbestos, side-by-side, buddies to the end. Thanks, Obama.

#158 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 03:52 PM | Reply

You're too emotional to understand who the polluters are. You refuse to even accept the facts.
As long as you can't SEE the pollution and slave labor that built your Tesla, You don't care.

You don't care about the humanitarian crisis on the southern border either. They're just human props for your political cause.
All you whine about is POWER. Political power is your only concern. The rest is just excuses for your party.

Dix is right about China and India. He's DEAD right. Spot on. You can't handle it.

#151 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Emotion and science vs stupidity. You're on the side of stupidity.

What "humanitarian crisis" are you talking about? Your cult calls it an invasion of illegals.

#159 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:52 PM | Reply

Obama's actions and inactions revealed many a Democrat farce.

He could have bankrupted foreign coal, but chose to subsidize it.

It's no too late to tariff the polluters. We can mobilize the entire 2nd and 3rd world in a global effort to clean up Mother Earth just by tariffing them until they stop killing the plantet.

We can get results *tomorrow*.

#160 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 03:53 PM | Reply

And steals babies from mothers to terrify them out of trying to come here.

Is that the humanitarian crisis you're so concerned about? The one your cult leader created?

#161 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:53 PM | Reply

Your honor, it would seem that we should be able to sue to make judges make different decisions based on the general welfare clause. Some of you aren't elected. Since the public's representative won't remove you, they must sue and bypass impeaching you.

#162 | Posted by Petrous at 2019-06-11 03:54 PM | Reply

What would signing it do, exactly? Details. please.

#158 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Create less pollution, kill less people. It's really that simple. But all you right wing pollution puppets want to keep arguing about minutae as if no one can see that you're always on the side of polluters in every argument.

#163 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 03:54 PM | Reply

"Obama's actions and inactions revealed many a Democrat farce."

President Obama repeatedly tried to repeal some of the most egregious of those subsidies.

But, wouldn't you know it???

They were all blocked by a U.S. Congress that had been bought out by campaign finance and lobbying expenditures from the fossil fuel industry.

Also, while he obviously living free in your head, Obama is not the President.

#164 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 03:58 PM | Reply

The concept of global warming was created by and for the Chinese in order to make U.S. manufacturing non-competitive.

11:15 AM · Nov 6, 2012

@RealDonaldTrump

It's a famous quote.

And you are right, Danni. The natural result of tariffing the worst polluting nations would be to shift production to economies that better protect the environment, like our own economy does.

There are so many reasons for TARIFFS NOW, for our *children's tomorrow*.

#165 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 03:59 PM | Reply

President Obama repeatedly tried to repeal some of the most egregious of those subsidies.

#164 | Posted by donnerboy

He did no such thing to foreign coal, just American coal.

The most egregious of all his environmentally disastrous policies is his Paris Accord.

In this way, Obama screwed over the children of the world.

#166 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 04:03 PM | Reply

WARNING: THERE ARE NO BRAKES ON THIS SUPER HIGHWAY

Posted by DixvilleNotch

Driving that train! High on insane.

Deplorable Dix you better watch your speed.

Trouble ahead, trouble behind.

Don't you know that notion just crossed my mind.

#167 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 04:03 PM | Reply

"There are so many reasons for TARIFFS NOW, for our *children's tomorrow*."

I haven't opposed tariffs but they need to be passed by Congress so that a manufacturer here who is considering a new factory would have some basis to believe they would be in place for a long time. Just having the President make them for "national security reasons" doesn't give any manufacturer any reason they will stay in place long enough for the manufacturer to get a return on his invesment.

#168 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-11 04:04 PM | Reply

.that I voted for a Party who promised they'd address it by making it worse.

#154 | POSTED BY DANFORTH

How do you figure?

Ryan was never going to get even a fraction of what he claimed he wanted. Overton Window and all that.

For his efforts Democrats made a video of a Ryan look-alike pushing a wheelchair-bound granny over a cliff.

That was the response - demagoguery.

Since this has become your new favorite thing...by now you should know my policy preferences pretty well. From that perspective why should I vote for Democrats?

#169 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 04:05 PM | Reply

And Trump's attitude to the EPA has obviously shown him to not really care about anything about the environment.

#170 | Posted by danni at 2019-06-11 04:05 PM | Reply

The bloated child rapist's easing of pollution controls will kill thousands.

www.vanityfair.com

#171 | Posted by reinheitsgebot at 2019-06-11 04:07 PM | Reply

I haven't opposed tariffs but they need to be passed by Congress...

#168 | POSTED BY DANNI

Thank you!

I've been saying all along that I don't think POTUS has the power to unilaterally impose tariffs.

Having said that, even if he does, the rest of your post is excellent anyway. Legislation results in stability and predictability.

#172 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 04:08 PM | Reply

In this way, Obama screwed over the children of the world.

#166 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

yeah remember when obama hired polluters to run the EPA? That was obama wasn't it?

#173 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 04:09 PM | Reply

Here is the problem I have with how Progressives and some liberals apply the clause: It's a catch-all. Just about anything can be defined as "promote the general welfare". But when I read Article I, Section 8 I see a lot of narrowly-defined congressional powers.

The fact that the framers knew how to narrowly define certain powers when they wanted to, yet chose to word "general welfare" the way they did, suggests they did so intentionally.

#174 | Posted by JOE at 2019-06-11 04:10 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Northern California is on flood watch throughout the summer."
Flood season is mostly over in California.
It's fire season in California now.
Do try and keep up.

#155 | Posted by donnerboy

Hey Donnerboy! Its the National Weather Service that gave the summer long warning due to the massive snowpack in the Sierra. You are up around Humboldt, right? Here's today's NWS flood warning for the Humboldt River:

...Some rivers and creek are running high...

NVC013-122359-
/O.CON.KLKN.FL.W.0009.000000T0000Z-000000T0000Z/
/CMSN2.2.ER.190527T0150Z.190615T0300Z.000000T0000Z.NR/
1059 AM PDT Tue Jun 11 2019

The Flood Warning continues for
The Humboldt River At Comus.
* until further notice.
* At 10:15 AM Tuesday the stage was 11.0 feet.
* Flood stage is 9.5 feet.
* Moderate flooding is occurring and Moderate flooding is forecast.
* Forecast...The river will continue rising to near 11.1 feet by
Friday evening. Additional rises may be possible thereafter.
* Impact...at 11.0 feet...Moderate to major lowland flooding
throughout the reach. Many rural roads near the river are flooded.
Minor to moderate flooding occurs in lower portions of Winnemucca.
Main area impacted is between the Union Pacific Railroad and
Golconda Street on the west and Second Street on the east, beneath
Interstate 80. This would be similar to flooding in February 2017.

#175 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 04:11 PM | Reply

yeah remember when obama hired polluters to run the EPA? That was obama wasn't it?

#173 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

Remember when Obama had the power to hammer foreign polluters? He subsidized them instead.

Fun and easy.

LOL

#176 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 04:12 PM | Reply

Speaks, you've been schooled. Go do your homework.

Then off to bed.

#177 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 04:15 PM | Reply

"He did no such thing to foreign coal, just American coal."

Obama era regulations aggressively pushed for accelerated closures of older coal-fired plants by setting national targets, by reducing carbon dioxide emissions, and encouraging adoption of cleaner energies, such as solar and wind power.

Those rules have never taken effect because of legal challenges from 27 states.

Thank Gawd Humpy reversed those decisions that Obama did not make.

And WTF are you babbling about? Trump left the Paris Climate talks... Where we could have affected those policies. Obama's actions toward developing clean energy was an effort to reduce our dependence on fossil fuels. Reducing our dependence on fossil fuels affects world markets.

That is how you best effect change. By reducing consumption not by punishing other countries. Or refusing to work with them.

#178 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 04:16 PM | Reply

Donnerboy -- Here's more from the NWS on flooding in your area:

* This will be a long duration high flow event for the Humboldt
River near Imlay, likely continuing into July.

* Forecast...Minor Flood stage may be reached by this weekend and
continue to slowly rise for a couple of weeks.

* Impact...At 10.3 feet...Minor flooding of Tungsten Road south of
the river between the river and the Pit Taylor Canal. Some minor
low land flooding is possible very near the river from the
Humboldt County line to Rye Patch.

PRECAUTIONARY/PREPAREDNESS ACTIONS...

Turn around, don`t drown when encountering flooded roads. Most flood
deaths occur in vehicles. Excessive runoff from snowmelt will cause
flooding of country roads, farmland, and other low lying spots.

You take care of yourself and your crop, Donnerboy.

#179 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 04:17 PM | Reply

That is how you best effect change. By reducing consumption not by punishing other countries. Or refusing to work with them.

#178 | Posted by donnerboy

Total BS.

Do both.

Reduce consumption and punish polluting countries. That's how you work with them.

Tariffs.

#180 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 04:19 PM | Reply

...Some rivers and creek are running high...

so?

There is no rain in the forecast.

Rivers always run high here in spring.

And I said, "mostly".

Nope, no flooding around here.

But, it is freakin hot. And getting hotter. That is for sure.

#181 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 04:20 PM | Reply

Obama era regulations aggressively pushed for accelerated closures of older coal-fired plants by setting national targets,

My recollection is (and my memory could be wrong) that Obama era regulations made retrofitting older plants so onerous that it couldn't be done and the construction of new, much cleaner and more efficient plants even more cost-prohibitive all the while grandfathering the older, dirtier and less efficient plants.

#182 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 04:21 PM | Reply

That's how you work with them.

Tariffs.

#180 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

That's exactly how NOT work with them. You can catch more flies with Obama honey than Trumpy vinegar.

I guarengoddamtee it.

#183 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 04:24 PM | Reply

Water level for Lake Charlevoix is the highest I've ever seen. The crazy thing is it was incredibly low in 2013. But then the winter of 2014 saw record snowfall and near-record cold temps and the water level rose 11 inches in one year. Of course, in the fall of '13 the water level was so low that the marina at my parents place had to be dredged because the water was close to being to shallow for the boats. Then '15 didn't see as much snowfall but record cold temps resulted in a late thaw for the lake. The late thaw kept nightly evaporation in check into the month of May. This winter wasn't that harsh but it was an extremely cold and rainy spring.

#184 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 04:30 PM | Reply

The policy that unlimited corporate money could buy our elections. The Global Climate change debate has been heavily tilted in favor of polluters because of it.

#91 | POSTED BY DANNI AT 2019-06-11 02:36 PM | FLAG:

Yep Citizens United is an abomination.

reclaimdemocracy.org

When American colonists declared independence from England in 1776, they also freed themselves from control by English corporations that extracted their wealth and dominated trade. After fighting a revolution to end this exploitation, our country's founders retained a healthy fear of corporate power and wisely limited corporations exclusively to a business role. Corporations were forbidden from attempting to influence elections, public policy, and other realms of civic society.

Initially, the privilege of incorporation was granted selectively to enable activities that benefited the public, such as construction of roads or canals. Enabling shareholders to profit was seen as a means to that end. The states also imposed conditions (some of which remain on the books, though unused) like these*:

Corporate charters (licenses to exist) were granted for a limited time and could be revoked promptly for violating laws.
Corporations could engage only in activities necessary to fulfill their chartered purpose.
Corporations could not own stock in other corporations nor own any property that was not essential to fulfilling their chartered purpose.
Corporations were often terminated if they exceeded their authority or caused public harm.
Owners and managers were responsible for criminal acts committed on the job.
Corporations could not make any political or charitable contributions nor spend money to influence law-making.

#185 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-06-11 04:31 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 2

You can catch more flies with Obama honey than Trumpy vinegar.
I guarengoddamtee it.

#183 | Posted by donnerboy

Why no results? 'cuz Trump?

Obama Honey. That's a great name for subsidizing Chinese Coal for 15 years under the Paris Accord!

So versatile, for so many Obama rollovers. Can I use it? Excuse me. May I use it?

Stay *dry*, while you stay cool.

Obama Honey

LOL

#186 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 04:34 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Remember when Obama had the power to hammer foreign polluters? He subsidized them instead.

Fun and easy.

LOL

#176 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

Yeah it's easy to blame everything on obama. Doesn't mean it's accurate or honest. But it sure is easy.

Problem is its hard not to be a total hypocrite about it.
Your cult leader doesn't give a damn about the climate, yet you're pissed about the last guy not doing enough.

#187 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 04:35 PM | Reply

Speaks, you've been schooled. Go do your homework.

Then off to bed.

#177 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Any thing else to contribute gnat?

#188 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 04:36 PM | Reply

The honey in this formula is access to the American market.

Learn that. Know that.

You want to call the American market Trump Honey? I'm in.

Tariff the polluters into compliance.

*For the children*

#189 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 04:36 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

Reduce consumption and punish polluting countries. That's how you work with them.

Tariffs.

#180 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

Reduce consumption...yet here you are whining about the last prez who did that, and praising the current prez who is doing the opposite.

#190 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 04:38 PM | Reply

you're pissed about the last guy not doing enough.

#187 | Posted by SpeakSoftly

Doing enough? He literally set us up to subsidize the worst polluters on the planet.

#191 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 04:40 PM | Reply

Obama's biggest success in reducing American consumption came from choking American economic growth.

He didn't target the world's biggest polluters. He subsidized them. Literally. Hundreds of billions of dollars.

#192 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 04:44 PM | Reply

Ciao for now.

Gotta make a buck.

I hope the roads are dry out there.

#193 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 04:45 PM | Reply

Doing enough? He literally set us up to subsidize the worst polluters on the planet.

#191 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

He raised MPG standards, decreased coal, and invested in clean tech. The exact opposite of what your cult leader did.

Not only that, your entire party thinks protecting the planet is a liberal conspiracy and it's patriotic and masculine to pollute. When jesus is coming back soon, it doesn't matter what you do to the planet.

#194 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 04:46 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#108 | Posted by JeffJ

Obama proposed carbon credits and signed the Paris Climate agreement.

Republicans refused to do the former, Trump pulled out of the latter.

But you keep supporting politicians who play Trump's --------------, so nothing will get done.

#195 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-11 04:48 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

iIf that quote is an accurate pull, AU, you win the 'Drudge Retort Post of the Month' award for sure.

#17 | POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY

#23 | Posted by oldwhiskeysour

Oh, it's accurate. there are many more, both from this and his previous handle. With time stamps:

In 39 minutes the polls on the Left Coast will close and put Obama over the top.
Suck it, Retardicans.
#568 | Posted by nullifidian at 2008-11-04 10:22 PM

5 more minutes, retardicans, before the Best Coast puts Obama over the top. Hahahahahahahahahaha.
#616 | Posted by nullifidian at 2008-11-04 10:55 PM
Florida for Obama!
Virginia for Obama!

Eat ----, Republicans!
#673 | Posted by nullifidian at 2008-11-04 11:17 PM

Why don't YOU move to another country, -----? You rightwing s--tbags better get out now, before patriots start tar and feathering you.
#340 | Posted by nullifidian at 2008-11-13 12:34 AM

And then he became a troll for the right wing. Go figure, huh?

#196 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-11 04:56 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Eat ----, Republicans!
#673 | Posted by nullifidian at 2008-11-04 11:17 PM
Why don't YOU move to another country, -----? You rightwing s--tbags better get out now, before patriots start tar and feathering you.
#340 | Posted by nullifidian at 2008-11-13 12:34 AM

And then he became a troll for the right wing. Go figure, huh?
#196 | POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY

One day you guys will have your eyes opened. an epiphany. Like waking from a long slumber.

You'll wonder, how did I not see it before? How could I have been so duped? LOL

Also, Dix owned you today. Trump Honey. hahaha

#197 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 05:09 PM | Reply

185, great information. If only, you know?

#198 | Posted by Petrous at 2019-06-11 05:12 PM | Reply

The preamble of the constitution is the mission statement. It descibes the purpose of having a country and a government. It is the why of our government. The body and the amendments are the who and how.

The preamble is every bit as important as everything that comes afterwards

#199 | Posted by hatter5183 at 2019-06-11 05:27 PM | Reply

#196 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY

Hey lounge lizard, shouldn't you be putting on your makeup and sequins and preparing for tonight's show at the old folks home?

#200 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 05:42 PM | Reply

"It is criminally negligent to focus on what the most energy efficient economy on the planet is doing while enabling the least energy efficient to continue to pillage the environment."

Who has jurisdiction there, World Court of ---- Nations?

#201 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 05:43 PM | Reply

From the article, it is one appellate court judge.

ROTFLMAO

#202 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 05:51 PM | Reply

You want to call the American market Trump Honey? I'm in.

Tariff the polluters into compliance.

*For the children*

#189 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

You might wanna stop smokin that crack.

For the children.

#203 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 05:52 PM | Reply

Re: #185

I'm with you.

Now do banks.

#204 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 05:52 PM | Reply

--one appellate court judge.

Obama judge. The kind of judge that Obama's "best friend" Flipper Joe Biden will appoint.

#205 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 05:56 PM | Reply

#205 | Posted by nullifidian

That'll send a tingle down your leg.

In 39 minutes the polls on the Left Coast will close and put Obama over the top.
Suck it, Retardicans.
#568 | Posted by nullifidian at 2008-11-04 10:22 PM

5 more minutes, retardicans, before the Best Coast puts Obama over the top. Hahahahahahahahahaha.
#616 | Posted by nullifidian at 2008-11-04 10:55 PM

Florida for Obama!
Virginia for Obama!

Eat ----, Republicans!
#673 | Posted by nullifidian at 2008-11-04 11:17 PM

#206 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-11 06:02 PM | Reply

"From the article, it is one appellate court judge.
ROTFLMAO"

You made up a quote to advance the excuse that so long as other people continue to pollute you're not going to stop?

#207 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 06:04 PM | Reply

I hope the roads are dry out there.

#193 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

Bro. We don't drive in the rivers. Usually. A little flooding might even be nice right now. We might need it to put out the fires that will be along shortly.

We broke a record today for high temperatures.

We not only broke it but we beat the hell out of it.

Previous record high for today was 69.

Today's high was 85. Only feet from the ocean.

lostcoastoutpost.com

It is well over 100 over hill. Poor bastages.

#208 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 06:07 PM | Reply

"Weaponizing children is another go-to tactic of today's Left."

Party of Weaponized Fetuses.

#209 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 06:08 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 3

Now NULLIFIDIAN supports the very Republicans who blocked anything and everything Obama wanted to do, even blocking his rightful Supreme Court pick. What a very confused individual.

#210 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-11 06:08 PM | Reply

I really do live in your head, don't I, lounge lizard?

All you're proving is that I'm a reflective person capable of changing my views, unlike a cradle to grave Democrat partisan hack like you.

#211 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 06:14 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

If the Garland pick was rightful it would have gone through.

Not your decision, eh?

#212 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-11 06:15 PM | Reply

Obama judge. The kind of judge that Obama's "best friend" Flipper Joe Biden will appoint.

#205 | Posted by nullifidian

Oh no! He'll appoint judges that try to protect innocent people? Better avoid that at all costs. We need trump judges who will protect corporate criminals instead.

#213 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 06:15 PM | Reply

Now do banks.

#204 | Posted by DixvilleNotch

The banks that your cult leader said he'd drain out of the swamp, and then instead hired into his cabinet?

#214 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 06:16 PM | Reply

Obama judge, right?

#2 | Posted by nullifidian

Do you even know how insane that sounds?

No.

Probably not.

Did you also wanna check to see if he was from one of the Mexico's?

That could affect his rulings you know.

#215 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-11 06:17 PM | Reply

"I'm a reflective person capable of changing my views"

Reflect on why they changed then.

#216 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 06:17 PM | Reply

#197 | Posted by SheepleSchism

All your posts are just bragging about winning some debate you can't even compete in.

You're like someone on the sideline of a fight going "oooooo! take that!" Too weak to actually fight yourself.

#217 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 06:17 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 2

#217 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

You're upset that Dix is right. instead of understanding why Dix is right.

So you lash out in an emotional outburst. instead of seeing who is polluting and how that can be diminished.

Again, you don't care about pollution or human suffering unless it gives you political power.

I hope you never have that power ever again.

#218 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 06:27 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

You're upset that Dix is right. instead of understanding why Dix is right.

So you lash out in an emotional outburst. instead of seeing who is polluting and how that can be diminished.

Again, you don't care about pollution or human suffering unless it gives you political power.

#218 | Posted by SheepleSchism

What is dix right about? That trump is trying to save the climate? Youre a moron for even thinking that could be true.

You dont care about pollution or human suffering because you joined the cult of a sociopath.

#219 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 07:16 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

What is dix right about?
#219 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Don't you remember when I made you cry over your Tesla? What, like 6 months ago? a year?
Because you refuse to see toxic pollution and child slave labor on the other side of the world.

Those Asian factories will never contribute to a Green Earth. Ever.
Tariff them out of business. and bring it home. Lots of jobs for the border flooders. only, they're union jobs. right?

Clean Green Union Jobs! Right here in America! What Democrat opposes that?

#220 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 07:32 PM | Reply

Don't you remember when I made you cry over your Tesla? What, like 6 months ago? a year?

#220 | Posted by SheepleSchism

You seem to be suffering delusions of grandeur. You sit there and type some nonsense then sit back imagining your opponent being upset or crushed by your debate skills. Then you post about how your just schooled everyone and celebrate your imaginary success.

I'm starting to wonder if maybe you ARE trump. I definitely see why you love him so much.

#221 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 07:41 PM | Reply | Funny: 1 | Newsworthy 1

And if you're so jealous of my car, get a better job than professional troll for trump, and you could buy one too.

Your lack of accomplishments is your own fault.

#222 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 07:45 PM | Reply

"Those Asian factories will never contribute to a Green Earth. Ever."

Well then.
I guess we'll just have to pick up their slack until the harm from those Asian factories is mitigated.
Do you have a better plan for a Green Earth?
???

#223 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 07:52 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Why do Democrats want China to continue manufacturing products for American consumption?

Why Is China Placing A Global Bet On Coal? - www.npr.org
China coal power building boom sparks climate warning - www.bbc.com
China's power industry calls for hundreds of new coal power plants by 2030 - unearthed.greenpeace.org

Why are Democrats ignoring Chinese contributions to the Climate Crisis?

#224 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 08:02 PM | Reply

"Why do Democrats want China to continue manufacturing products for American consumption?"

Not seeing that in the party platform, so I'm pretty sure you're just making things up.

#225 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 08:04 PM | Reply

And if you're so jealous of my car, get a better job than professional troll for trump, and you could buy one too.
Your lack of accomplishments is your own fault.

#222 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

You should be ashamed of your purchase.

Electric shock – Tesla cars in Hong Kong more polluting than petrol models, report claims - www.scmp.com
Tesla Pays Out $86,000 in Settlement Over Hazardous Waste and Air Pollution [Update] - earther.gizmodo.com
Tesla, ironically, faces $139,000 environmental pollution fine at Fremont electric car factory - www.bizjournals.com

#226 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 08:06 PM | Reply | Funny: 3

The Dirt on Clean Electric Cars - New research shows some drivers might spew out less CO2 with a diesel engine.

www.bloomberg.com

"Beneath the hoods of millions of the clean electric cars rolling onto the world's roads in the next few years will be a dirty battery.

Every major carmaker has plans for electric vehicles to cut greenhouse gas emissions, yet their manufacturers are, by and large, making lithium-ion batteries in places with some of the most polluting grids in the world.

By 2021, capacity will exist to build batteries for more than 10 million cars running on 60 kilowatt-hour packs, according to data of Bloomberg NEF. Most supply will come from places like China, Thailand, Germany and Poland that rely on non-renewable sources like coal for electricity."

#227 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 08:10 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

LOL, those fine amounts are about the cost of a Tesla.
I guess the price of a new Tesla just went up what, five dollars?

#228 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 08:10 PM | Reply

#228 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Pollution enabler.

#229 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 08:11 PM | Reply

What's a "pollution enabler?"

#230 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 08:12 PM | Reply

"Most supply will come from places like China, Thailand, Germany and Poland that rely on non-renewable sources like coal for electricity."

Like any other product.
Got it.

#231 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 08:12 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Also: Germany?

#232 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 08:13 PM | Reply

You should be ashamed of your purchase.

Electric shock – Tesla cars in Hong Kong more polluting than petrol models, report claims - www.scmp.com
Tesla Pays Out $86,000 in Settlement Over Hazardous Waste and Air Pollution [Update] - earther.gizmodo.com
Tesla, ironically, faces $139,000 environmental pollution fine at Fremont electric car factory - www.bizjournals.com

#226 | Posted by SheepleSchism

You should be ashamed of your gullibility. But you'll swallow anything the trump cult puts in your mouth.

www.scmp.com - FROM YOUR OWN LINK: "The report discloses that the author maintains a "long position" in oil company BP"

"good enough for me!" -Sheepfortrump

#233 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 08:22 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

www.bloomberg.com

"Beneath the hoods of millions of the clean electric cars rolling onto the world's roads in the next few years will be a dirty battery.

#227 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Wow you know how to use google to find fossil fuel press releases! Good job dum dum!

futurism.com

The Fossil Fuel Industry Is Ramping up Attacks on Electric Cars
Millions of dollars are spent each year to keep gas-guzzling cars on the roads and EVs off them.

But it works wonders on morons who willingly accept pollution propaganda like sheep4trump

#234 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 08:26 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Biden promises he'll cure cancer if elected president."

Shouldn't he focus on fulfilling Obama's promise to stop the sea from rising?

#235 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 08:33 PM | Reply

Shouldn't he focus on fulfilling Obama's promise to stop the sea from rising?

#235 | Posted by nullifidian

Let's see either a link to that promise or an admission that you just make stuff up or swallow right wing propaganda.

#236 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 08:45 PM | Reply

--Let's see either a link to that promise

You could've googled it in less time than it took you to write that post, you lazy socialist.

#237 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-11 08:48 PM | Reply

You could've googled it in less time than it took you to write that post, you lazy socialist.

#237 | Posted by nullifidian

But that would deprive us of the chance to laugh at the propaganda sources where you get your misinformation. So let's see the link to your pathetic "news" site who told you that lie.

#238 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 08:56 PM | Reply

Shouldn't he focus on fulfilling Obama's promise to stop the sea from rising?

#235 | Posted by nullifidian

Let's see either a link to that promise or an admission that you just make stuff up or swallow right wing propaganda.

#236 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

The road will be long. I face this challenge with profound humility, and knowledge of my own limitations. But I also face it with limitless faith in the capacity of the American people. Because if we are willing to work for it, and fight for it, and believe in it, then I am absolutely certain that generations from now, we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment when we began to provide care for the sick and good jobs to the jobless; this was the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow and our planet began to heal; this was the moment when we ended a war and secured our nation and restored our image as the last, best hope on Earth. This was the moment - this was the time - when we came together to remake this great nation so that it may always reflect our very best selves, and our highest ideals. Thank you, God Bless you, and may God Bless the United States of America.

I love the part about humility followed a couple of sentences later about the planet beginning to heal.

www.huffpost.com

#239 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 09:20 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

#239 | Posted by JeffJ

So where's the part where he promised to stop the seas from rising? It's not like nulli would lie would he?

#240 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 09:22 PM | Reply

"I love the part about humility followed a couple of sentences later about the planet beginning to heal."

I love the part about people rolling coal just to try to make sure the planet didn't begin to heal, so you could make these kinds of astute observations.

#241 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 09:24 PM | Reply

So where's the part where he promised to stop the seas from rising?

#240 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

I provided the quote, the context and a link to the full text of the speech.

He said what he said. Parse it any way you wish.

#242 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 09:26 PM | Reply

He said what he said. Parse it any way you wish.

#242 | Posted by JeffJ

Take it up with the guy who misrepresented what was said. But that's all your cult can really do these days.

#243 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 09:29 PM | Reply

Don't become overemotional, Speaks. You've invested so much in your "Green" car. So sad.

Is Politico ok? Don't rush headlong into the report. Just take baby steps. easy now.

Are electric cars worse for the environment? - Crunch the numbers, and it looks like all those subsidies might be counterproductive. www.politico.com

Short Circuit: The High Cost of Electric Vehicle Subsidies - www.manhattan-institute.org

#244 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 09:54 PM | Reply

Electric cars won't save the planet without a clean energy overhaul – they could increase pollution - theconversation.com

#245 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 09:59 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

I love the part about humility followed a couple of sentences later about the planet beginning to heal.

I love the part where the quoted section shows Nulli to be a lying loser.

He said what he said. Parse it any way you wish.

#242 | Posted by JeffJ

There is no parsing anything.

He didn't "promise to stop the sea from rising". Period.

#246 | Posted by jpw at 2019-06-11 10:04 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

He didn't "promise to stop the sea from rising". Period.
#246 | POSTED BY JPW

Good eye, JPW. It sounds more like he was saying that it already happened:

"...we will be able to look back and tell our children that this was the moment ..."

it sounds like the planet was healing from the soothing sounds of Obama's speech.

#247 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 10:14 PM | Reply | Funny: 2

it sounds like the planet was healing from the soothing sounds of Obama's speech.

#247 | Posted by SheepleSchism

I'm so glad you were able to understand my post.

#248 | Posted by jpw at 2019-06-11 10:30 PM | Reply

JPW and Speaks,

Do you really not understand why Obama gets mocked for that comment?

Yes it was feel-good rhetoric but the backdrop was faux Roman columns as if he was some deity descending upon the masses.

Trump is a ridiculous braggart and rightly gets called out for his BS. Obama suggesting that his moment was so monumentally kumbaya that the rise of the oceans would slow and the planet would begin to heal was truly cringe-worthy. Yet his supporters ate it up like rabid cult members. You know, the type of behavior you both heap scorn toward some Trump supporters. And rightly so.

#249 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-11 10:39 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Obama suggesting that his moment was so monumentally kumbaya that the rise of the oceans would slow and the planet would begin to heal was truly cringe-worthy.

That's not what he said.

If you're going to mock somebody, at least understand what you're trying to mock.

Otherwise you look kind of foolish.

#250 | Posted by jpw at 2019-06-11 10:43 PM | Reply

"Obama suggesting that his moment was so monumentally kumbaya that the rise of the oceans would slow and the planet would begin to heal was truly cringe-worthy."

Not nearly as cringe-worthy as people who mock and reject global warming, then say even if it is true, we shouldn't do anything since China isn't doing anything.

#251 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 10:55 PM | Reply

Do you have a better plan for a green earth?

#252 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 10:56 PM | Reply

"Yet his supporters ate it up like rabid cult members."

When your side does that, you wave it off by saying you expect the opposition party to act like the opposition party.

Who care what his supporters ate? Who cares what his opponents ate? Your understanding of politics is no different than a high school popularity contest.

#253 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-11 10:58 PM | Reply

Your understanding of politics is no different than a high school popularity contest.
#253 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Have you observed this behavior on the DR among anyone besides Trump "cult members"?

#254 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 11:16 PM | Reply

#252 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Do you have any plan for a green earth?

#255 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-11 11:17 PM | Reply

www.democrats.org

#256 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-12 12:25 AM | Reply

www.gp.org

#257 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 12:31 AM | Reply

we shouldn't do anything since China isn't doing anything.

#251 | Posted by snoofy

Silly straw man, although you have half a point.

We should make China do something, right?

#258 | Posted by DixvilleNotch at 2019-06-12 01:00 AM | Reply

How about more nuclear power?

It's not exorbitantly expensive and it doesn't produce greenhouse gases.

#35 | Posted by JeffJ

"soaring, uncertain costs continue to plague nuclear power in the 21st century. Between 2002 and 2008, for example, cost estimates for new nuclear plant construction rose from between $2 billion and $4 billion per unit to $9 billion per unit, according to a 2009 UCS report, while experience with new construction in Europe has seen costs continue to soar."

"With this track record, it's not surprising that nuclear power has failed to attract private-sector financing -- so the industry has looked to government for subsidies, including loan guarantees, tax credits, and other forms of public support. And these subsidies have not been small: according to a 2011 UCS report, by some estimates they have cost taxpayers more than the market value of the power they helped generate"
www.ucsusa.org

#259 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2019-06-12 01:05 AM | Reply

I've got s buddy who graduated from Va. Tech w/ Nuclear Engineering degree.

He buries fuel rods in Nevada. haha

#260 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 01:10 AM | Reply

"www.gp.org
#257 | POSTED BY SHEEPLESCHISM"

LOL.
Which of your comments from this thread reflect those policies?

#261 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-12 01:29 AM | Reply

"We should make China do something, right?"

What should we make China do?

#262 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-12 01:29 AM | Reply

A 2009 UCS report estimated that taxpayers could be on the hook for anywhere from $360 billion to $1.6 trillion if then-current proposals for nuclear expansion were realized.
www.ucsusa.org

#263 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2019-06-12 01:30 AM | Reply

A 2009 UCS report estimated that taxpayers could be on the hook for anywhere from $360 billion to $1.6 trillion if then-current proposals for nuclear expansion were realized.
www.ucsusa.org

POSTED BY PUNCHYPOSSUM AT 2019-06-12 01:30 AM | REPLY

You don't need nuclear. We have wind and solar now.

#264 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-06-12 01:37 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

You don't need nuclear. We have wind and solar now.

#264 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-06-12 01:37 AM |

Yes but they're still some God damn fools who advocate for more nuclear power

#265 | Posted by PunchyPossum at 2019-06-12 02:36 AM | Reply

#239 | Posted by JeffJ

Come on, dude. "...generations from now we will be able to look back ... this was be the moment when the rise of the oceans began to slow ..." (sic)

Don't you think we as a people should do something to prevent your kids from having to live on a planet whose climate has gone haywire because we did nothing while we had the opportunity. The oceans ARE rising ... and getting hotter. Coral reefs are only the first symptom of the changes taking place. Islands are being submerged. 3 this year, and others experiencing rising waters. What happens when the rising ocean temperatures start affecting the fish people feed on?

At least Obama tried to do something. Your side wants to do nothing.

I have a relative who works for the government and just spent his second several year stint in Alaska. The changes he saw from 20 years ago made a believer in climate change out of him. He is now a former Republican thanks to his own witness.

#266 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-12 03:31 AM | Reply

Hey lounge lizard, shouldn't you be putting on your makeup and sequins and preparing for tonight's show at the old folks home?

#200 | Posted by nullifidian

You forgot to email your address, failing brain curmudgeon.

Did they serve the chocolate pudding you wanted?

#267 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-12 05:53 AM | Reply

It is clear now that if we take the RAW data, non-adjusted, there is no climate change experienced within North America since the 1890's. We are seeing a warming trend in Europe and some areas in the arctic - but the climate record there is very sketchy. The fact that we are getting above average rainful, snowfall, decreased disasters (hurricanes, tornadoes, etc) and season weather that flies in the face of the climate change model predictions, I think it would be criminally neglect to toss taxpayer money at this 'problem'. This is far from settled science no matter how much squawking we hear from the left.

#268 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-06-12 06:47 AM | Reply

"Flood season is mostly over in California.
It's fire season in California now.
#155 | POSTED BY DONNERBOY "

What are you talking about? I have property in NorCal and we fear too much rain and snowpack melt at once which is what causes the flooding. So, no - it is NOT fire season now. With the lack of reservoir capacity, we are going to be letting a lot of good water go out to the ocean...hopefully it does not take too much of the Oroville spillway or Sacramento levy with it.

#269 | Posted by iragoldberg at 2019-06-12 07:18 AM | Reply

I'm so glad we have people like Sheeple here to redirect the conversation to the important things like some individual poster's Tesla. God forbid we actually discuss the merits of this lawsuit.

#270 | Posted by JOE at 2019-06-12 07:22 AM | Reply

#268 do you have anything other than your ass to support that giant pile of 💩?

#271 | Posted by jpw at 2019-06-12 08:35 AM | Reply

You sit there and type some nonsense then sit back imagining your opponent being ...#221 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 07:41 PM
your entire party thinks ... #194 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-11 04:46 PM

Hopefully this will spawn in you a moment of clarity. You're accusing someone else of doing precisely what you've done here; that's called projection. You've now been shown evidence of the behavior. Will it spark some change in you or will you turn a blind eye to the weakness of character that I've shown you?

#272 | Posted by Avigdore at 2019-06-12 10:15 AM | Reply

on't become overemotional, Speaks. You've invested so much in your "Green" car. So sad.

Is Politico ok? Don't rush headlong into the report. Just take baby steps. easy now.

Are electric cars worse for the environment? - Crunch the numbers, and it looks like all those subsidies might be counterproductive. www.politico.com

Short Circuit: The High Cost of Electric Vehicle Subsidies - www.manhattan-institute.org

#244 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Jealousy is an emotion too sheep4trump. Seems like its the only one you've got left.

#273 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 11:55 AM | Reply

Do you have any plan for a green earth?

#255 | Posted by SheepleSchism

What do you care? Your cult leader is a pollution lover and you whine about anyone who tries to help fix it.

#274 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 11:57 AM | Reply

" So, no - it is NOT fire season now. "

www.cbsnews.com

theweek.com

www.sfchronicle.com

arstechnica.com

You can't fix stupid.

#275 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-12 12:19 PM | Reply

We should make China do something, right?

#258 | POSTED BY DIXVILLENOTCH

Have at it.

You and humpy would make a fine team.

Dumb and Dumber.

#276 | Posted by donnerboy at 2019-06-12 12:22 PM | Reply

You can't fix stupid.

#275 | Posted by donnerboy

If you actually live in Cali, TokerBoy, you know that the fire season really gets going at the end of summer when the foliage has dried up.

#277 | Posted by nullifidian at 2019-06-12 12:25 PM | Reply

"That's not the role of the judiciary. That's never been the role of the judiciary. Danforth constantly snipes at me for voting Republican over Democrat, this is a big reason why.
#33 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"

Riiight, Jeff. The role of the judiciary is to choose the winner of a state election to install him as the President of the United States. I can see why you would be attracted to such a principled side of the bench.

#278 | Posted by mOntecOre at 2019-06-12 12:51 PM | Reply

or force the companies to buy offsets to make up for it.
So no, you really are the damn problem.
#106 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT
LOL. buying offsets is alchemy.
#110 | POSTED BY SHEEPLESCHISM

Why? If I pollute X amount and I pay to have planted Y amount of trees that clean up X amount of pollutants... That seems like a much better deal than doing nothing.

#279 | Posted by Sycophant at 2019-06-12 01:02 PM | Reply

Well, first off, her clients' rights aren't being infringed because there are many court cases already that set the precedent that under-age people are not protected fully under the Constitution. Don't believe me the look it up.

Secondly, the science behind global warming only proves that the climate is warming, not that people have been causing the climate to change any differently than what would happen naturally (regardless if pro-anthropogenic warming people choose to believe it or not). For one thing, and there was an article about it the other day on here, ocean levels are going down in some areas. So sea level change is not accurate. Also, the climate is changing differently depending on where you live. In some cases, it's getting better for the inhabitants of that area. So, it can be proven the US's actions actually help people in some ways (even though that's not the intent, of course).

Basically, there is no way to prove criminal neglect when so many holes exist. It's a waste of taxpayer money, just like all of the money being spent on trying to prove anthropogenic global warming. It's already proven that global warming is occurring. They proved that many, many decades ago when they learned about ice ages and such. It should all be spent on building infrastructure so global warming doesn't cause negative impacts to society.

#280 | Posted by humtake at 2019-06-12 01:05 PM | Reply

You can't fix stupid.

#275 | Posted by donnerboy
If you actually live in Cali, TokerBoy, you know that the fire season really gets going at the end of summer when the foliage has dried up.

#277 | POSTED BY NULLIFIDIAN

If you lived in California, you'd know they have two fire seasons.

June to September during the high heat.
And October through April due to the high winds.

The bulk of California's rain actually falls October through April... Starting in the fall you call dry...

It's the summer months that are actually dry in California.

#281 | Posted by Sycophant at 2019-06-12 01:05 PM | Reply

Secondly, the science behind global warming only proves that the climate is warming, not that people have been causing the climate to change any differently than what would happen naturally
#280 | Posted by humtake

That is a lie.

Therefore your entire post is based on a lie.

Therefore no one should even read it.

#282 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 01:22 PM | Reply | Funny: 1

That seems like a much better deal than doing nothing.
#279 | POSTED BY SYCOPHANT

Jeff is right, they're indulgences. You pay to feel better. absolve guilt.

Planting trees is a good thing. But it isn't going to make up for China's 600 new coal fired plants.

It's not going to clean mine waste, plastics clogging the oceans, or factory farms polluting the streams and waterways.

I suppose it will provide shade and a backrest as you choke on the air and toxic water.

#283 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 01:37 PM | Reply

Jeff is right, they're indulgences. You pay to feel better. absolve guilt.

#283 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Hear that jeff? You've got the dumbest guy on the site loving your idiotic analogy.

#284 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 01:40 PM | Reply

It's like running around punching handicap kids in the face and then donating to Jerrys Kids and thinking you're absolved.

#285 | Posted by 101Chairborne at 2019-06-12 01:43 PM | Reply

Riiight, Jeff. The role of the judiciary is to choose the winner of a state election to install him as the President of the United States. I can see why you would be attracted to such a principled side of the bench.

#278 | POSTED BY MONTECORE

Florida SCOTUS was violating their own election laws.

#286 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 01:46 PM | Reply

Hear that jeff? You've got the dumbest guy on the site loving your idiotic analogy.

#284 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Feel free to show any actual data documenting that carbon offsets have had any measurable success in greenhouse gas reduction.

#287 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 01:51 PM | Reply

What do you care? Your cult leader is a pollution lover and you whine about anyone who tries to help fix it.
#274 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

You're incapable of anything other than hysterics.

#288 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 02:05 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Feel free to show any actual data documenting that carbon offsets have had any measurable success in greenhouse gas reduction.

#287 | Posted by SheepleSchism

You dont need data you need a high school science class.

You literally just asked me "how do you know that reducing greenhouse gasses will reduce greenhouse gasses?"

#289 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 02:38 PM | Reply

You're incapable of anything other than hysterics.

#288 | Posted by SheepleSchism

You're incapable of debating so you just call your opponent emotional and think that qualifies as a win.

#290 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 02:39 PM | Reply

You literally just asked me
#289 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

No, I didn't. Now you're demonstrating that you're incapable of reading or comprehending.

Show the data that documents measurable results that buying carbon offsets reduces greenhouse emissions.

Show the data that these offset purchases actually counter China's 600 new coal fired power plants.

I want to see the scientific study that supports these indulgences for carbon sin.

#291 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 02:54 PM | Reply

Show the data that documents measurable results that buying carbon offsets reduces greenhouse emissions.

#291 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Now you're playing semantics. They don't reduce greenhouse emissions they reduce greenhouse gasses in the air, so the same net effect on climate change as reducing emissions.

Is that too emotional for you?

#292 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 03:03 PM | Reply

"It is clear now that if we take the RAW data, non-adjusted, there is no climate change experienced within North America since the 1890's."

It's clear that the person who wrote that has never earned a living working with data.

#293 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-12 03:04 PM | Reply

"Show the data that documents measurable results that buying carbon offsets reduces greenhouse emissions.
#291 | Posted by SheepleSchism"

Do you also require data to confirm that if someone buys a glass of lemonade at your lemonade stand, that results in a meaurable decrease in the amount of lemonade you have remaining?

#294 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-12 03:07 PM | Reply

Unless you can demonstrate with verifiable peer-reviewed data that purchasing carbon offsets has any measurable effect on the climate, then you're engaging in faith and hope - indulgences for carbon sins.

Enjoy your lemonade while you search for evidence of the Climate Bigfoot that you claim exists.

#295 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 03:12 PM | Reply

The plaintiffs are asking Judge Aiken to force the U.S. government to develop a plan to transition the country's energy system off of fossil fuels.

That's not the role of the judiciary. That's never been the role of the judiciary. Danforth constantly snipes at me for voting Republican over Democrat, this is a big reason why.

POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-06-11 01:36 PM | REPLY | F

Never heard of the 1st Amendment have you??

#296 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-06-12 03:13 PM | Reply

It should be easy to find, Gore has been hawking them for 20 years.

There should be tons of data. not.

#297 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 03:14 PM | Reply

#296 Laura,

How is this a 1st Amendment issue?

#298 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 03:17 PM | Reply

Scenes from the new Cold War unfolding at the top of the world
Militaries are scrambling to control the melting Arctic.

www.nationalgeographic.com

Melting Arctic ice opens up a new frontier for US military competition with Russia and China

www.stripes.com

#299 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-12 03:18 PM | Reply

"The plaintiffs are asking Judge Aiken to force the U.S. government to develop a plan to transition the country's energy system off of fossil fuels.

That's not the role of the judiciary."

Sure it is.

Like when the courts oversee a bankruptcy, and the transition out of bankruptcy.

#300 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-12 03:21 PM | Reply

#296 Laura,
How is this a 1st Amendment issue?

POSTED BY JEFFJ AT 2019-06-12 03:17 PM | REPLY

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

#301 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-06-12 03:22 PM | Reply

"Unless you can demonstrate with verifiable peer-reviewed data that purchasing carbon offsets has any measurable effect on the climate"

You're demanding data that can't exist until carbon offsets are implemented.

Are you doing that on purpose, or are you so ignorant you don't realize you're putting the cart before the horse?

#302 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-12 03:25 PM | Reply

- You're demanding data that can't exist until carbon offsets are implemented.

LOL. So you have faith in these purchases. to produce a desired effect, but with no evidence that they will.

It's madness. The only way to deal with pollution is deal with the polluters.

Like, comply or be run out of business. They aren't going to comply, so the rest is an exercise in indulgences and subsidies.

#303 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 03:32 PM | Reply

I can't believe how hard Democrats will fight for China's right to pollute the planet and engage in slave labor. It's a stunning revelation for some, I'm sure.

#304 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 03:34 PM | Reply

#301

OK. But I'm not suggesting the plaintiffs shouldn't have a right to sue the government. What I'm saying is the suit itself is a joke.

#305 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 03:36 PM | Reply

Unless you can demonstrate with verifiable peer-reviewed data that purchasing carbon offsets has any measurable effect on the climate, then you're engaging in faith and hope - indulgences for carbon sins.

#295 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Haha you're too stupid to even come up with your own flawed analogies so you're copying jeff's from yesterday.

#306 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 03:36 PM | Reply

I can't believe how hard Democrats will fight for China's right to pollute the planet and engage in slave labor. It's a stunning revelation for some, I'm sure.

#304 | Posted by SheepleSchism

I can't believe you still pretend to be a progressive after copy/pasting right wing talking points all day every day.

Get a real job.

#307 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 03:37 PM | Reply

OK. But I'm not suggesting the plaintiffs shouldn't have a right to sue the government. What I'm saying is the suit itself is a joke.

Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 03:36 PM | Reply

No actually it is you who is a joke. This is a legit suit that the judge will decide on. That's what the judicial branch is for.

#308 | Posted by LauraMohr at 2019-06-12 03:39 PM | Reply

We pollute... because China?

#309 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-06-12 03:39 PM | Reply

That's what the judicial branch is for.

It's quickly becoming another branch of the Republican Party.

Thanks mostly to Bitch BcConnell.

#310 | Posted by ClownShack at 2019-06-12 03:41 PM | Reply

#306 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

ad hominem

#307 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

hysterics

....and no debate.

#311 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 03:41 PM | Reply

That's what the judicial branch is for.

#308 | POSTED BY LAURAMOHR

The judicial branch doesn't control energy policy. That is set by congress and enforced by the Executive.

This case should have been tossed out. If these plaintiffs don't like our current energy policy they should either protest or support candidates whose energy policies align with their own.

#312 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 03:42 PM | Reply

I can't believe how hard Democrats will fight for China's right to pollute the planet and engage in slave labor. It's a stunning revelation for some, I'm sure.

#304 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Huh. Your guy sure is. (If he was actually your preferred candidate):

Combat Climate Change and Pass a Green New Deal - Bernie Sanders

We say to Donald Trump and the fossil fuel industry that climate change is not a hoax but is an existential threat to our country and the entire planet – and we intend to transform our energy system away from fossil fuel and into energy efficiency and sustainable energy and, in the process, create millions of good paying jobs. All of us have a moral responsibility to make certain that the planet we leave to our children and grandchildren is healthy and habitable.

berniesanders.com

#313 | Posted by AMERICANUNITY at 2019-06-12 03:44 PM | Reply

Get a real job.
#307 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

You-> youtu.be

#314 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 03:45 PM | Reply

#313 | POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY

I agree with every word.

#315 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 03:46 PM | Reply

#313 | POSTED BY AMERICANUNITY

I disagree with Sanders but given what you just quoted maybe the plaintiffs should consider supporting him instead of trying to get the courts to set energy policy.

#316 | Posted by JeffJ at 2019-06-12 03:54 PM | Reply

hysterics

....and no debate.

#311 | Posted by SheepleSchism

You teach people how to treat you.

You're treating all of us to treat you as a joke, unworthy of engaging in real debate.

#317 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 04:11 PM | Reply

The judicial branch doesn't control energy policy. That is set by congress and enforced by the Executive.

This case should have been tossed out. If these plaintiffs don't like our current energy policy they should either protest or support candidates whose energy policies align with their own.

#312 | Posted by JeffJ

The judicial branch manages damages due to victims resulting from the behavior of reckless parties.

That is what this is about. This isn't about a judge writing energy policy.

#318 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 04:13 PM | Reply

"This case should have been tossed out. If these plaintiffs don't like our current marriage policy they should either protest or support candidates whose marriage policies align with their own.
#312 | POSTED BY JEFFJ"

See what I did there?

#319 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-12 04:33 PM | Reply

"LOL. So you have faith in these purchases. to produce a desired effect, but with no evidence that they will."

There's evidence cap and trade works.
You just refuse to see it.

"It's madness. The only way to deal with pollution is deal with the polluters."

Which is what cap and trade does. It lets polluters make a deal by creating a market for emissions.

You believe that markets work, don't you?

#320 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-12 04:38 PM | Reply

#317 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

...runs away from confronting facts about China, hurling insults.

Speaks, I support Green everything. I've changed the way I do things, the way I use energy, the way I treat trash, recycling, it effects all my purchases, and so forth. I'd love to see green renewable energy that minimizes harm to the environment, animals, insects, soil, water. I'm going to do and support these ideals regardless of what my neighbor does, or what China does. I genuinely believe that I have a moral obligation towards the planet and life, and the future.

But we have a problem in China, Russia, and Asia in general. Also to the south in South American countries, and Africa. All of our efforts, as well intentioned as they are, produce minimal results offset by Chines manufacturing, and third-world polluters in general. Dix was right that we, the US, controls our trade practices. We've outsourced our imports to the worst polluting nations on the planet. If you want to change the planet, we have to change how and with whom we trade.

We also have to deal with, here at home, the toxic swamp of chems we allow to be sprayed on our food, soil, factory farm animals, farm runoffs, cleaning fluids, and on and on and on. Yes, I understand the issues raised about conservatives, regulations, EPA, etc. However, when Dem's have been in power, they did little more than conduct ribbon-cutting-ceremonies regarding true conservationism. They did some good things, but because of lobbyists, Wall Street, and corporate glad-handing, they did far too little.

I'm done with the politics of two parties accomplishing nothing while personally enriching themselves at the public trough and worrying about little more than their legacy. I'm ready for real solutions, real ideas, and real action. Not talking points, finger pointing, and hysteria. Until you get on board the solution train, you're just rifding in the failure caboose of a political system that left the tracks long ago. I'm not a doctor, but I'd prescribe a bath bomb, scented candles, and a few hours of quiet to digest some hard truths.

#321 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 04:52 PM | Reply

Which is what cap and trade does. It lets polluters make a deal by creating a market for emissions.
You believe that markets work, don't you?

#320 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

It's just money changing hands. the pollution continues unabated.

It's madness.

#322 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 04:53 PM | Reply

"It's just money changing hands. the pollution continues unabated."

Incorrect on both counts.

#323 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-12 05:06 PM | Reply

Speaks, I support Green everything. .

#321 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Your very first sentence was a lie. You support trump above all else. Trump is the opposite of green anything.

Every day you spend all day repeating the propaganda and talking points of the most anti environment president and party in modern history.

#324 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 05:49 PM | Reply

"I support Green everything."

LOL
You've posted 77 times in this thread.
Which ones(s) show your support for anything green?

#325 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-12 05:51 PM | Reply

#324 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

Now you've got Snoofy acting in hysterics. it's contagious, I tell you.

#326 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 05:58 PM | Reply

Now you've got Snoofy acting in hysterics. it's contagious, I tell you.

#326 | Posted by SheepleSchism

I'm losing track of all the times you lose a debate so you call your opponent emotional.

Is that really your only trick? No wonder this is the best job you could find.

#327 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 06:07 PM | Reply

#327 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

You running away from confronting China isn't losing a debate.

It's just you, running away from pollution, and claiming victory.

You're hysterical. and delusional. get a bath bomb. and scented candles.

#328 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 06:19 PM | Reply

It's just you, running away from pollution, and claiming victory.

You're hysterical. and delusional. get a bath bomb. and scented candles.

#328 | Posted by SheepleSchism

You just described your strategy exactly: offer no rebuttal, call opponent emotional, claim victory, run away.

And then you added the trump twist - accuse your opponent of whatever you're doing.

#329 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 06:58 PM | Reply

"You just described your strategy exactly: offer no rebuttal, call opponent emotional, claim victory, run away."

You forgot, say you support "Green everything" as you take your victory lap!
Then run away.

#330 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-12 07:04 PM | Reply

#329 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY
#330 | POSTED BY SNOOFY

Runs away from Chinese pollution factories.

Blames Trump for Ganges river.

#331 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 07:29 PM | Reply

Runs away from Chinese pollution factories.

Blames Trump for Ganges river.

#331 | Posted by SheepleSchism

Another trump technique - assign fake positions to your opponents.

Do you glue your hair on like he does every morning?

#332 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 07:38 PM | Reply

-assign fake positions
#332 | POSTED BY SPEAKSOFTLY

You're confronting Chinese pollution?

-nope-

#333 | Posted by SheepleSchism at 2019-06-12 07:42 PM | Reply

Runs away from Chinese pollution factories.

Blames Trump for Ganges river.

Is this supposed to be clever - assigning a fake position of blaming Trump for the Chinese polluting a river that's not in China?

Or is it literal and incredibly stupid?

Either way, it missed.

#334 | Posted by YAV at 2019-06-12 07:50 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

ou're confronting Chinese pollution?

-nope-

#333 | Posted by SheepleSchism

You said I blame trump for the ganges river. Let's see the quote.

#335 | Posted by SpeakSoftly at 2019-06-12 08:25 PM | Reply

"You're confronting Chinese pollution?"

I hadn't realized straw was such a big environmental problem in China.

#336 | Posted by snoofy at 2019-06-12 08:30 PM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2019 World Readable

Drudge Retort