Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Very

6 (50%)

Some

4 (33.3%)

Not sure

0 (0%)

Not really

1 (8.3%)

Not in the slightest

1 (8.3%)

Total Members Voted: 11

Voting closed: February 15, 2022, 10:51:36 AM

[Hamilton Samuels]

The Biden administration has removed Trump-appointed atmospheric scientist Betsy Weatherhead from her role overseeing a comprehensive report on how climate change is affecting the U.S., the Washington Post first reported Monday.

Why it matters: Weatherhead has not been fired — merely reassigned to the U.S. Geological Survey — the move represents an effort by the Biden administration to remove Trump-era appointees from scientific roles, per CNN.

Stay on top of the latest market trends and economic insights with Axios Markets. Subscribe for free

Of note: The move could cause further delays to the next edition of the National Climate Assessment, which is congressionally mandated to be produced every four years.

The big picture: Weatherhead's original appointment to the position in November came as a surprise given that she is a mainstream climate scientist whose work reflects that climate change is a serious threat — unlike some other Trump-appointees.

However, Weatherhead did allegedly clash with some of the other officials involved about the "direction of the report," per the Post.

I can just hear that clash in meetings, now. 

"Anyone else here named Weatherhead besides me? Weather head. Say it again. Weather head. That makes me Head of all Weather! So, you people need to listen to me!"

[Hamilton Samuels]

This guy should just argue that he was doing what Maxine Waters wants him to do---be "more confrontational":

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/drivers-molotov-cocktail-bleach-attack-on-nypd-cops-was-planned-feds-say/3006914/

[LarryBnDC]

When you condemn the protest more so than the motivation for same it maintains status quo.

Responding to protests of police violence with more police violence is sort of counterproductive in my view.

I don't condemn the protest more than the motivation for it - not even close to it.

And yes, the persistence and recurrence of police violence is a far bigger problem than anything Rep. Waters said.

That doesn't make her words okay.

 


She spoke the words of the CR movement. They may not have been ‘strategic’ but saying be confrontational is not a call to violence.

What she did was no different than Trump telling people to go to the Capitol because of the "stolen election".

Don't like the outcome of the election? Riot.

Don't like it if the trial of Chauvin doesn't end in a guilty verdict? Riot.


Same behavior.

Those of interested in the law condemn both.

Others make excuses or attempt to redefine a clear message as something other than what was said in order to justify breaking the law or to argue that the law doesn't matter.

Either we live by the Constitution (the one that Waters and Trump swore to uphold) or we don't.

But when we don't, we will get the violence we deserve.

She said to be confrontational.

That is the same language used during the Civil Rights movement encouraging civil disobedience.

Comparing her to Trump is flat out stupid.

[LarryBnDC]

This guy should just argue that he was doing what Maxine Waters wants him to do---be "more confrontational":

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/drivers-molotov-cocktail-bleach-attack-on-nypd-cops-was-planned-feds-say/3006914/

Bitch, please.

[barton]

DK, but when Trump said phrases like what Waters said,  his listeners seemed to latch onto the message as code for get violent.  It's not that her message isn't in the Gandhian spirit,  it's that American ears now seem to hear it the wrong way and not just on the political Right.   

[Hamilton Samuels]

When you condemn the protest more so than the motivation for same it maintains status quo.

Responding to protests of police violence with more police violence is sort of counterproductive in my view.

I don't condemn the protest more than the motivation for it - not even close to it.

And yes, the persistence and recurrence of police violence is a far bigger problem than anything Rep. Waters said.

That doesn't make her words okay.

 


She spoke the words of the CR movement. They may not have been ‘strategic’ but saying be confrontational is not a call to violence.

What she did was no different than Trump telling people to go to the Capitol because of the "stolen election".

Don't like the outcome of the election? Riot.

Don't like it if the trial of Chauvin doesn't end in a guilty verdict? Riot.


Same behavior.

Those of interested in the law condemn both.

Others make excuses or attempt to redefine a clear message as something other than what was said in order to justify breaking the law or to argue that the law doesn't matter.

Either we live by the Constitution (the one that Waters and Trump swore to uphold) or we don't.

But when we don't, we will get the violence we deserve.

She said to be confrontational.

That is the same language used during the Civil Rights movement encouraging civil disobedience.

Comparing her to Trump is flat out stupid.

Ignoring the context of her irresponsible remarks is flat out ignorance, willfull or otherwise.

[Hamilton Samuels]

This guy should just argue that he was doing what Maxine Waters wants him to do---be "more confrontational":

https://www.nbcnewyork.com/news/local/crime-and-courts/drivers-molotov-cocktail-bleach-attack-on-nypd-cops-was-planned-feds-say/3006914/

Bitch, please.

He is no different than the Jan 6 loons. Inspired by his "leadership" to act stupidly.

Fuckhead.

[Hamilton Samuels]

DK, but when Trump said phrases like what Waters said,  his listeners seemed to latch onto the message as code for get violent.  It's not that her message isn't in the Gandhian spirit,  it's that American ears now seem to hear it the wrong way and not just on the political Right.

Her implication is for the assembled to react to a verdict that she doesn't desire "by any means necessary".

Code speech, "Permission to riot, granted."

Same as Trump in 1/6/21.

[REDSTATEWARD]

DK, but when Trump said phrases like what Waters said,  his listeners seemed to latch onto the message as code for get violent.  It's not that her message isn't in the Gandhian spirit,  it's that American ears now seem to hear it the wrong way and not just on the political Right.

The Judge in the case has a different take on Waters’ words.

[LarryBnDC]

DK, but when Trump said phrases like what Waters said,  his listeners seemed to latch onto the message as code for get violent.  It's not that her message isn't in the Gandhian spirit,  it's that American ears now seem to hear it the wrong way and not just on the political Right.

Sad to say but there is a double standard. Trump spoke to people who thought they were being oppressed.

Waters spoke to people who ARE being repressed.

We as a people have to stop falling for the both sides arguments.

White folks freaked under Trump because they believed their elections had been stolen by ‘THEM!’
and they attacked the Capitol with two missions in mind; overturn the free and fair elections of 2020 AND the violently overthrow the United States on behalf of Donald Trump.

We’re sitting here with bated breath HOPING the jury saw what the world saw; a cop slowly, deliberately murder a man with impunity.

[LarryBnDC]

DK, but when Trump said phrases like what Waters said,  his listeners seemed to latch onto the message as code for get violent.  It's not that her message isn't in the Gandhian spirit,  it's that American ears now seem to hear it the wrong way and not just on the political Right.

Her implication is for the assembled to react to a verdict that she doesn't desire "by any means necessary".

Code speech, "Permission to riot, granted."

Same as Trump in 1/6/21.

Hyperbole, much?

By no means the same.

[REDSTATEWARD]

Well, ‘Ole Joe found a way to silence his cackling excuse of a Vice President;
For a change he told the truth about the crisis at the border.
A crisis he thought Kammy was going to help fix.
Nearly a month after putting her in charge at the border she is still measuring for curtains at the remodeled Veep Villa,

[LarryBnDC]

Well, ‘Ole Joe found a way to silence his cackling excuse of a Vice President;
For a change he told the truth about the crisis at the border.
A crisis he thought Kammy was going to help fix.

Typical GOP bullshit.

“The Democrats are taking too long to clean up the mess we made!”

[Hairy Lime]

DK, but when Trump said phrases like what Waters said,  his listeners seemed to latch onto the message as code for get violent.  It's not that her message isn't in the Gandhian spirit,  it's that American ears now seem to hear it the wrong way and not just on the political Right.

Her implication is for the assembled to react to a verdict that she doesn't desire "by any means necessary".

Code speech, "Permission to riot, granted."

Same as Trump in 1/6/21.

Hyperbole, much?

By no means the same.

There are 3 reasons putzley is likening Waters to Trump: he is trying to trigger you, she is black, and he is a racist.

[barton]

What bothered me was not the "confrontation" (which I did understand in the civil rights sense,  that protest is confrontation) but rather the opinion on a specific verdict before all the facts are heard and all the legal procedures of a trial are done.   That IS disrespectful to the law.  Mind you,  I cannot imagine any exculpatory nugget emerging after what I and millions of other people saw in the video,  but there is still the principle of letting the process play out before questioning it.   And much of the case, and which of the three charges is the best fit, pertains to the defendant's state of mind, and that is not quite clear from the video.   All the jurors (1/3 of them African American) have to grapple with this matter of mental state, setting aside bias as much as humanly possible.  So we wait.