Green New Deal: Is It Really Just About Climate Change?

[diesel1959]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

So, instead of everybody getting forty acres and a mule, some will be getting a muleshoe while others get a Tesla, an iPhone, and a bitchin’ crib, YO!

#BECAUSEEQUALITYAIN’TEQUITY!

 

[HKShooter65]

Ugh, really?

Uh, yes.
I only believe half of what I say.
Always a wonder if anyone takes me 33% seriously.
Fun to toss ideas against the wall and see if anything sticks.

AOC is floating extreme legislative concepts about because the loves the extensive attention she gets.
She's not produced anything even remotely palatable or passable but look at all the media attentiveness and recognition bestowed upon her.

Smart. Yes.
In contrast, Ted Cruz has some great ideas born of experience and gets not 2% the exposure.
AOC? Influencer? Perhaps with maturity and experience.

The GOP needs a similarly radiant media Cinderella.

Had a good day shooting another guy's ammo. 6mm Creedmoor isn't catching on very well though.

H

 

[easy rider]

Uh, yes.
I only believe half of what I say.
Always a wonder if anyone takes me 33% seriously.
Fun to toss ideas against the wall and see if anything sticks.

AOC is floating extreme legislative concepts about because the loves the extensive attention she gets.
She's not produced anything even remotely palatable or passable but look at all the media attentiveness and recognition bestowed upon her.

Smart. Yes.
In contrast, Ted Cruz has some great ideas born of experience and gets not 2% the exposure.
AOC? Influencer? Perhaps with maturity and experience.



The GOP needs a sparkling media darling.



H

If you portray yourself in a serious way, you'll be taken seriously.

AOC smart? That's debatable. I find her as someone that champions causes on a knee jerk reaction. There may be areas where she is smart, I just haven't seen it. Charismatic? For sure, she has become the media darling and certainly that takes a certain amount of charisma. Intelligent? Unless she's out to portray herself as naive, no. If she ever has to have a real debate with an intelligent person, I believe she will be crucified.

 

[HKShooter65]

OK.
Serious way:

https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/scienc...-glacier-big-enough-fit-two-thirds-ncna965696

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/01/climate/thwaites-glacier-antarctica-cavity.html

It'll take a catastrophe to convince some.

And, yes, I surmise there are those who will maintain that all NASA PhDs are mouthpieces for liberals.

 

[billyb4u64]

Al Gore couldn't mae president but made many millions on the enviromental movement . Some people make money on air .

The problem the above is that almost anything you can think of, maybe even everything, with benefit somebody somewhere, even as it hurts you.

Sent from my LGMS550 using Tapatalk

 

[diesel1959]

OK.
Serious way:

https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/scienc...-glacier-big-enough-fit-two-thirds-ncna965696

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/01/climate/thwaites-glacier-antarctica-cavity.html

It'll take a catastrophe to convince some.

And, yes, I surmise there are those who will maintain that all NASA PhDs are mouthpieces for liberals.

I read that; however, it never stated when the void was actually discovered. If it has only now been discovered, then there's no way of knowing whether (or if) the void has enlarged or is enlarging. I know they try to make that implication; however, in the first sentence of the penultimate paragraph, it says, "[t]he discovery of the void comes as Scambos and other American and British scientists are gearing up for a major new research initiative." Could it be, dare I say, a push for major new funding sources? I am aghast that a scientist or group of scientist might stoop to such . . . but yeah.

 

[easy rider]

OK.
Serious way:

https://www.nbcnews.com/mach/scienc...-glacier-big-enough-fit-two-thirds-ncna965696

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/01/climate/thwaites-glacier-antarctica-cavity.html

It'll take a catastrophe to convince some.

And, yes, I surmise there are those who will maintain that all NASA PhDs are mouthpieces for liberals.

You can also make the case that the polar ice caps have grown since 2012.

 

[avvidclif]

Y

Our survival rates for cancer are at the top, same with other terrible diseases compared to other countries. We have shorter waits and better treatments. We develop more new treatments and advancements than any other nation. But damn, we die younger so it must be the fault of the healthcare system and not gluttony or insane murder rates in cities like Chicago. Just close your eyes to the details, it’s the fault of our healthcare system.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Isn't that like saying GUNS are the cause of so many homicides, not the shooter???

 

[oldag]

She's very bright. She got elected to congress at 29!
She's attractive too and intelligent attractive women are much sexier than dull ones.


I just don't agree with her.

Bright?? Her IQ is scarcely bigger than her shoe size. Anyone who thinks we can to 100% renewables is an idiot who does not care to educate themselves. And the list could go on and on.

 

[oldag]

Uh, yes.
I only believe half of what I say.
Always a wonder if anyone takes me 33% seriously.
Fun to toss ideas against the wall and see if anything sticks.

AOC is floating extreme legislative concepts about because the loves the extensive attention she gets.
She's not produced anything even remotely palatable or passable but look at all the media attentiveness and recognition bestowed upon her.

Smart. Yes.
In contrast, Ted Cruz has some great ideas born of experience and gets not 2% the exposure.
AOC? Influencer? Perhaps with maturity and experience.

The GOP needs a similarly radiant media Cinderella.

Had a good day shooting another guy's ammo. 6mm Creedmoor isn't catching on very well though.

H

I guess every board has to have a liberal troll.

 

[diesel1959]

I guess every board has to have a liberal troll.

Some folks tell themselves they are moderate and open-minded . . . but it ain't always so. When the left is full of shit, a thinking person can tell the difference, and there is no middle ground in such instances. :meh:

 

[Younggun]

Isn't that like saying GUNS are the cause of so many homicides, not the shooter???

I don’t think that’s the case I was making. I’ll try to clarify.


We have the freedom and wealth to make poor decisions. It’s what happens when you have freedom.


People in this country often make poor decisions. People like to blame McDonalds and the video posted earlier about eating only McDonalds is a great example. But find one person who hasn’t know for at least 30 years that McDonalds is garbage food that is bad for you. Yet instead of making a documentary about people making bad decisions it becomes a poster of “Look what McDonalds does to people!”

McDonalds didn’t make anyone fat. They offered a product and people CHOSE to buy it knowing full well it was unhealthy (at least in modern context, ‘90s to now).

How many smoke knowing full well what the effects are?


In Chicago young men are choosing to join street gangs and follow a life of crime. Chicago blames the gun and goes after firearms, yet the city and a few others are still the source of so many murders it actually lowers the average lifespan of the United States.


My point was that we have the freedom and means to make poor decisions. If you don’t have the freedom to make a poor decision (like eating unhealthy food), you don’t really have freedom.

But it’s not the fault of our healthcare system or lack of access. There’s not an ER in the country that can turn anyone away, even if you walk in and say you have no money and will never pay them. Hell, you can eat flown by helicopter to a top notch facility, have emergency life saving surgery performed, never pay a dime, and practically nothing will happen to you for it. Everyone in this nation has “access” to healthcare and it’s arguably the best in the world. But it can’t undo a lifetime of bad decisions leading to obesity and heart failure.


Hope that clarifies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[avvidclif]

I don’t think that’s the case I was making. I’ll try to clarify.


We have the freedom and wealth to make poor decisions. It’s what happens when you have freedom.


People in this country often make poor decisions. People like to blame McDonalds and the video posted earlier about eating only McDonalds is a great example. But find one person who hasn’t know for at least 30 years that McDonalds is garbage food that is bad for you. Yet instead of making a documentary about people making bad decisions it becomes a poster of “Look what McDonalds does to people!”

McDonalds didn’t make anyone fat. They offered a product and people CHOSE to buy it knowing full well it was unhealthy (at least in modern context, ‘90s to now).

How many smoke knowing full well what the effects are?


In Chicago young men are choosing to join street gangs and follow a life of crime. Chicago blames the gun and goes after firearms, yet the city and a few others are still the source of so many murders it actually lowers the average lifespan of the United States.


My point was that we have the freedom and means to make poor decisions. If you don’t have the freedom to make a poor decision (like eating unhealthy food), you don’t really have freedom.

But it’s not the fault of our healthcare system or lack of access. There’s not an ER in the country that can turn anyone away, even if you walk in and say you have no money and will never pay them. Hell, you can eat flown by helicopter to a top notch facility, have emergency life saving surgery performed, never pay a dime, and practically nothing will happen to you for it. Everyone in this nation has “access” to healthcare and it’s arguably the best in the world. But it can’t undo a lifetime of bad decisions leading to obesity and heart failure.


Hope that clarifies.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can see my comment went completely over the top, never moved a hair.

 

[Davetex]

She's very bright. She got elected to congress at 29!

Being an attention whore does not equate to being smart. It only equates to being the loudest and most obnoxious.

 

[Tex62]

Folks, they are trying to wreck you. They are trying to bring your standard of living down to everyone else’s. The US is 5% of the world population and has 25% of the wealth. Why import third world populations into first world countries.

They want one world government. What stands in their way? Why do they want your guns?

This is all a means to an end. They are not stupid. They think you are.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tex62]

I disagree, I believe her constituents are very dull.

Yes, she is not bright. Do really think a 27 year old bar tender can come up with this shit on her own. Who’s controlling her?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Tex62]

Nancy Pelosi may run the House, But AOC runs the Democratic Party. She is their leader, they are all falling in line behind her vision and plans.

Problem is, she is a functional idiot. Nothing she says is even remotely possible. The world is going to end in 12 years? OK.

US to eliminate airplanes? Sure go tell SouthWest, American, Delta, United to stop buying planes for delivery in 10 years. Telling Boeing to scrap all new plane designs as they will not be delivered in time.

Tell NASA to scrap all plans for exploration. Tell SpaceX, Blue Origin, Orbital there will be no more launches in 10 years.

Upgrade all homes? How? Almost all home construction uses massive fossil fuel based machinery to mine or deliver the raw materials.


Eliminate all fossil-fuel based cars? There are 275 Million. Where do we put them? What do we replace them with. What about all the existing trucks, buses, machinery? Tens of million more.

This where got our energy in 2017:

• Natural gas—31.8%
• Petroleum (crude oil and natural gas plant liquids)—28.0%
• Coal—17.8%
• Renewable energy—12.7%
• Nuclear electric power—9.6%

How do we replace 77% of our fossil fuel based energy sources in 10 years.

I could go on and on.

She’s a deep state stooge.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Younggun]

I can see my comment went completely over the top, never moved a hair.

Maybe, but some here would have read it as you described and didn’t want to be misconstrued.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[HKShooter65]

I'm in my usual, Monday morning, fact-check mode.

When Trump tweeted AOC and the Green New Deal proposed "to permanently eliminate all Planes, Cars, Cows, Oil, Gas & the Military" he was clearly in his Make-Shit-Up mode.
Most unfortunate is that many believe his tweets.
https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1094375749279248385
No such proposals have been made.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...en-new-deal-democrats/?utm_term=.f6414c1ff334

AOC's Green New Deal is obviously excessively ambitious.
It's taking existing societal trends too far.
Most everything in it is simply a re-presentation of extant environmental and energy initiatives already under way.

I'm just wondering why adjectives like Socialist, communist, calling her dumb, daft and a whore come into the discussion.

 

[Mowingmaniac 24/7]

After discovering a leftist among us I hit the ignore button on them.

Why pay them any attention?