Escape from Elba

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

Poll

What do you expect on Wednesday?

Reports of protests are overblown. A few incidents around the country, but nothing major.
- 5 (45.5%)
A few major incidents in capitals, but nothing much in DC.
- 5 (45.5%)
A major incident in DC, but nothing much around the country.
- 0 (0%)
More than 10 capitals have major upheavals, but nothing much in DC.
- 0 (0%)
A major incident in DC plus more than 10 capitals with significant upheavals.
- 1 (9.1%)
More than half the capitals around the country have problems with protesters, but DC is quiet.
- 0 (0%)
DC has major problems, while more than half the capitals around the country also have considerable trouble with protesters.
- 0 (0%)
Huge disruption to the day.
- 0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 9

Voting closed: January 19, 2021, 10:49:21 PM


Pages: 1 ... 1376 1377 [1378] 1379 1380 ... 4288

Author Topic: Trump Administration  (Read 1584781 times)

barton

  • Guest
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20655 on: September 22, 2019, 04:16:21 PM »

That Truman quote has been spreading through the blogosphere.   Classic and timely analysis of red-scaring. 

You Crane:  As several noted here, there is only one reason the administration could have to illegally block the normal conduits of a whistleblower report.

Farmer bailout...

Quote
And yet strangely there has been no tea party like movement in response to this wild and obviously political government spending.

Huh.

Heh.
Logged

REDSTATEWARD

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5939
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20656 on: September 22, 2019, 04:19:45 PM »

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49773869?fbclid=IwAR2df7fB2tf7DRzTRSiyDEPff1o1-sQZ60tpkP2IjpAPFZuqg2ZN-kLMKko

Climate change is accelerating.


*       GLOBAL WARMING
Here’s Your Non-Hysterical Guide To The Science Required To Address Climate Change


Excerpt

We need research and spending in three areas: constant power sources, moderation of demand through improved energy efficiency, and approaches to mitigating the effects and cost of climate change.

One viable alternative energy option would be constructing many dams to provide hydropower. Government regulations, however, would require studies of environmental impacts, battling activists, and obtaining permits—all likely to be expensive and time-consuming. A greater focus on geothermal may be another option, as would finding ways to make nuclear fission disaster-proof and how to improve the handling of nuclear waste.
Since the U.S. Navy already powers many of its vessels using fission plants, we have proof that small-scale nuclear power is possible if properly commercialized. Yet we hear far too little of any of these possibilities. They’re simply not as headline-grabbing as apocalyptic predictions. Case in point is teenage eco-celebrity Greta Thunberg, who seems to think that school boycotts somehow produce energy or reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Although it is likely a few decades away, the ultimate solution likely lies in figuring out how to power our entire civilization with nuclear fusion. Although promising, nuclear fusion is highly energy-intensive to achieve. Unlike the chain reaction of fission, every individual fusion of atoms must be forced by supercharging the environment.







https://thefederalist.com/2019/08/07/guide-scientifically-address-climate-change/

Logged

LarryBnDC

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 11127
    • View Profile
    • The Shinbone Star
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20657 on: September 22, 2019, 04:21:03 PM »

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49773869?fbclid=IwAR2df7fB2tf7DRzTRSiyDEPff1o1-sQZ60tpkP2IjpAPFZuqg2ZN-kLMKko

Climate change is accelerating.


*       GLOBAL WARMING
Here’s Your Non-Hysterical Guide To The Science Required To Address Climate Change


Excerpt

We need research and spending in three areas: constant power sources, moderation of demand through improved energy efficiency, and approaches to mitigating the effects and cost of climate change.

One viable alternative energy option would be constructing many dams to provide hydropower. Government regulations, however, would require studies of environmental impacts, battling activists, and obtaining permits—all likely to be expensive and time-consuming. A greater focus on geothermal may be another option, as would finding ways to make nuclear fission disaster-proof and how to improve the handling of nuclear waste.
Since the U.S. Navy already powers many of its vessels using fission plants, we have proof that small-scale nuclear power is possible if properly commercialized. Yet we hear far too little of any of these possibilities. They’re simply not as headline-grabbing as apocalyptic predictions. Case in point is teenage eco-celebrity Greta Thunberg, who seems to think that school boycotts somehow produce energy or reduce greenhouse gas emissions.
Although it is likely a few decades away, the ultimate solution likely lies in figuring out how to power our entire civilization with nuclear fusion. Although promising, nuclear fusion is highly energy-intensive to achieve. Unlike the chain reaction of fission, every individual fusion of atoms must be forced by supercharging the environment.







https://thefederalist.com/2019/08/07/guide-scientifically-address-climate-change/


Fuck the Federalist.
Logged
If you can convince the lowest white man he's better than the best colored man, he won't notice you're picking his pocket. Hell, give him somebody to look down on, and he'll empty his pockets for you.

Lyndon Johnson

kiidcarter8

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12267
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20658 on: September 22, 2019, 05:35:07 PM »

Mr. Trump didn’t mention a provision of foreign aid to Ukraine on the call, said this person, who didn’t believe Mr. Trump offered the Ukrainian president any quid-pro-quo for his cooperation on any investigation.



https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/problem-with-rudy-giuliani-spin-on-ukraine/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=french&utm_content=ukraine&fbclid=IwAR3OkHBrbl1TrFm9jMgDzaBhEXZ-Y3qE3HW6zzB-1Y1z2tRbis4LPrrN9yM
Logged

kiidcarter8

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12267
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20659 on: September 22, 2019, 05:43:27 PM »

"If the President is essentially withholding military aid at the same time that he is trying to browbeat a foreign leader into doing something illicit that is providing dirt on his opponent during a presidential campaign, then that may be the only remedy that is coequal to the evil that conduct represents," the California Democrat told CNN's Jake Tapper on "State of the Union," stopping short of calling on Congress to immediately launch proceedings.


https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/22/politics/adam-schiff-donald-trump-ukraine-whistleblower-investigation-impeachment/index.html

What the F is this a-hole talking about?

Logged

bankshot1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5907
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20660 on: September 22, 2019, 05:52:23 PM »

I certainly expect AG Barr will lend some legal clarity to this situation and why a report, used for Congressional oversight,  is instead being buried.
Logged

kiidcarter8

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12267
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20661 on: September 22, 2019, 05:55:33 PM »

The president’s defenders are rightly emphasizing the lack of evidence (so far) of any express quid pro quo tying vital aid to Ukraine to an investigation of Trump’s political opponents...



Logged

bankshot1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5907
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20662 on: September 22, 2019, 06:00:58 PM »

Mr. Trump didn’t mention a provision of foreign aid to Ukraine on the call, said this person, who didn’t believe Mr. Trump offered the Ukrainian president any quid-pro-quo for his cooperation on any investigation.



https://www.nationalreview.com/corner/problem-with-rudy-giuliani-spin-on-ukraine/?utm_source=Facebook&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=french&utm_content=ukraine&fbclid=IwAR3OkHBrbl1TrFm9jMgDzaBhEXZ-Y3qE3HW6zzB-1Y1z2tRbis4LPrrN9yM

Kid's doing some cherry-picking, its as if he wanted to want to fool us.

here's what he omitted for the NR's criticism of Guiliani and his lies.



The president’s defenders are rightly emphasizing the lack of evidence (so far) of any express quid pro quo tying vital aid to Ukraine to an investigation of Trump’s political opponents, but there’s a key detail in the story above that undermines the notion that these eight alleged requests reflect the proper exercise of presidential diplomacy. This same key detail undermines Giuliani’s spin.

But is Trump “doing his job” when he’s asking the “corrupt country” to work with his own personal counsel? Is it right for the president’s personal counsel to press an allied nation to investigate the president’s political opponents? Trump’s alleged request that Ukraine work with his personal counsel raises the issue of a potential personal political favor — at the same time that vital foreign aid to Ukraine was on the line. There is not a Republican alive who would find it acceptable for a Democratic president to press a foreign country to work with his personal lawyer to investigate a domestic political rival.

There is a pressing need for lawmakers to be informed of the substance of the whistleblower’s complaint — and to seek evidence that corroborates or refutes his account. And while the Wall Street Journal report is disturbing, it’s also important to note that it’s based in large part on anonymous sourcing. While Giuliani’s admitted efforts to spur a Ukrainian investigation are now widely known, we don’t yet know the whole truth (or anything close to the whole truth).


Kid you're a dishonest voice and can't be trusted, which is why no one does.
Logged

josh

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18995
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20663 on: September 22, 2019, 06:21:27 PM »

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49773869?fbclid=IwAR2df7fB2tf7DRzTRSiyDEPff1o1-sQZ60tpkP2IjpAPFZuqg2ZN-kLMKko

Climate change is accelerating.


*       GLOBAL WARMING
Here’s Your Non-Hysterical Guide To The Science Required To Address Climate Change


Excerpt

We need research and spending in three areas: constant power sources, moderation of demand through improved energy efficiency, and approaches to mitigating the effects and cost of climate change.

One viable alternative energy option would be constructing many dams to provide hydropower. Government regulations, however, would require studies of environmental impacts, battling activists, and obtaining permits—all likely to be expensive and time-consuming. A greater focus on geothermal may be another option, as would finding ways to make nuclear fission disaster-proof and how to improve the handling of nuclear waste.

Since the U.S. Navy already powers many of its vessels using fission plants, we have proof that small-scale nuclear power is possible if properly commercialized. Yet we hear far too little of any of these possibilities. They’re simply not as headline-grabbing as apocalyptic predictions. Case in point is teenage eco-celebrity Greta Thunberg, who seems to think that school boycotts somehow produce energy or reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Although it is likely a few decades away, the ultimate solution likely lies in figuring out how to power our entire civilization with nuclear fusion. Although promising, nuclear fusion is highly energy-intensive to achieve. Unlike the chain reaction of fission, every individual fusion of atoms must be forced by supercharging the environment.


https://thefederalist.com/2019/08/07/guide-scientifically-address-climate-change/


Oh, look! A link for the quote. Thank you, Ward.

None of your quoted piece addresses the first bolded clause, so I will come back to that.

It is entertaining to see something claiming to be non-hysterical choose to misrepresent what Greta Thunberg is saying and doing, almost as if they were afraid she might be successful in getting enough people mobilized to get governmental policy changed.

Fusion is only a couple decades away?

http://blogs.discovermagazine.com/crux/2016/03/23/nuclear-fusion-reactor-research/#.XYfsQChKjIU
https://www.thenewatlantis.com/publications/the-fusion-illusion

Quote
“The fusion community clings to the hope that fusion energy is just thirty years away — and that it will solve all our energy problems,” Seife notes. “The promise of a fusion reactor a few decades away has been a cliché for a half century.”
From Seife's book, Sun in a Bottle: The Strange History of Fusion and the Science of Wishful Thinking.
https://books.google.com/books?id=ifeh21iGE10C&pg=PT165&lpg=PT165&dq=%E2%80%9CThe+promise+of+a+fusion+reactor+a+few+decades+away+has+been+a+clich%C3%A9+for+a+half+century.%E2%80%9D&source=bl&ots=aaI_BdwGnx&sig=ACfU3U0q9YdkQ-aQ-EZ2ZZTUhm6WKtcFaA&hl=en&sa=X&ved=2ahUKEwiW9ZrEtuXkAhWKYcAKHdwtBXoQ6AEwAXoECAUQAQ#v=onepage&q=%E2%80%9CThe%20promise%20of%20a%20fusion%20reactor%20a%20few%20decades%20away%20has%20been%20a%20clich%C3%A9%20for%20a%20half%20century.%E2%80%9D&f=false


It's ironic that the authors are busy touting technology to save us with fusion, while knocking battery technology as a tool from pillar to post. Why they think that the one is viable, while the other (which has made vastly more progress in the last 20 years than fusion has) is hopeless is not explained.

But back to the first comment I made. These are some of the recommendations:
Quote
Coping with rising sea levels is likely to be more cost-effective than the trillions of dollars in costs and lost gross domestic product needed to drastically reduce hydrocarbon use in the absence of cost-competitive alternatives.

Last summer:
Quote
Published today in Environmental Research Letters, a study led by the UK National Oceanographic Centre (NOC) found flooding from rising sea levels could cost $14 trillion worldwide annually by 2100, if the target of holding global temperatures below 2 ºC above pre-industrial levels is missed.

I've seen an extrapolation that the cost to the US to mitigate sea level rise could be as low as $400 billion.
Quote
according to a new report from The Center for Climate Integrity and Resilient Analytics, "High Tide Tax: The Price to Protect Coastal Communities from Rising Seas," it's going to cost about $400 billion in the next 20 years to make sure that doesn't happen.

So what does $400 billion buy? It covers the construction of approximately 50,000 miles of coastal barriers in 22 states, which must be completed, the report said, in half the time it took to build the U.S. highway system.

The center's calculations did not include protection for pieces of land that do not have major public infrastructure, like parks or wildlife refuges.

The center's report focuses on the amount of seawall construction necessary to protect the country's coastal real estate from a one-year storm surge, which is the level to which coastal water rises in any given year during a typical storm, according to historical sea-level data. But, according to experts who contributed to the report, sea level rise will be 6.5 feet by the year 2100. The report also noted that the country can right away expect more of the type of 13-foot storm surges that inundated the New York and New Jersey coasts during Superstorm Sandy in 2012.

In any case, the report's authors wrote that their estimates are based on "modest" sea level rise projections.

Even so, the center said that protecting themselves from sea level rise will cost more than 130 counties a bare minimum of at least $1 billion and that 14 states are looking at a price tag of at least $10 billion. Florida alone, the center said, will have to pay $76 billion in seawall expenses.

These 20-year costs are just 10% to 15% of the total that these communities will have to pay in the future, according to the center.

But it's not that simple:
https://blog.ucsusa.org/guest-commentary/what-is-the-cost-of-one-meter-of-sea-level-rise

Meanwhile, the ostriches who wrote this supposed guide had this winning comment:
Quote
Warming might increase the overall availability of arable farmland. If we adjust to the “new normal” and increase the availability of genetically engineered plants resistant to droughts, floods, and heat, however, this could permit more resource-efficient production of crops, livestock, and other products.

Then again... "Andrew I. Fillat spent his career in technology venture capital and information technology companies. He is also the co-inventor of relational databases. Henry I. Miller, a physician and molecular biologist, is a senior fellow at the Pacific Research Institute."
Logged
The day Richard Nixon failed to answer that subpoena is the day he was subject to impeachment because he took the power from Congress over the impeachment process away from Congress, and he became the judge and jury." ~Lindsey Graham

REDSTATEWARD

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5939
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20664 on: September 22, 2019, 06:39:09 PM »

https://www.bbc.com/news/science-environment-49773869?fbclid=IwAR2df7fB2tf7DRzTRSiyDEPff1o1-sQZ60tpkP2IjpAPFZuqg2ZN-kLMKko

Climate change is accelerating.


*       GLOBAL WARMING
Here’s Your Non-Hysterical Guide To The Science Required To Address Climate Change


Excerpt

We need research and spending in three areas: constant power sources, moderation of demand through improved energy efficiency, and approaches to mitigating the effects and cost of climate change.

One viable alternative energy option would be constructing many dams to provide hydropower. Government regulations, however, would require studies of environmental impacts, battling activists, and obtaining permits—all likely to be expensive and time-consuming. A greater focus on geothermal may be another option, as would finding ways to make nuclear fission disaster-proof and how to improve the handling of nuclear waste.

Since the U.S. Navy already powers many of its vessels using fission plants, we have proof that small-scale nuclear power is possible if properly commercialized. Yet we hear far too little of any of these possibilities. They’re simply not as headline-grabbing as apocalyptic predictions. Case in point is teenage eco-celebrity Greta Thunberg, who seems to think that school boycotts somehow produce energy or reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

Although it is likely a few decades away, the ultimate solution likely lies in figuring out how to power our entire civilization with nuclear fusion. Although promising, nuclear fusion is highly energy-intensive to achieve. Unlike the chain reaction of fission, every individual fusion of atoms must be forced by supercharging the environment.


https://thefederalist.com/2019/08/07/guide-scientifically-address-climate-change/


Oh, look! A link for the quote. Thank you, Ward.



None of your quoted piece addresses the first bolded clause, so I will come back to that.
But you didn’t.
[/quote]

You need new glasses.

Or more likely a new brain.

Everything below "But back to the first comment I made. These are some of the recommendations:" addresses it.

Lie, deny, and obfuscate, Ward. You have zero facts to support you or your non-climate scientist/non-economist friends.

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/21/politics/senators-home-state-polling/index.html
« Last Edit: September 22, 2019, 08:33:12 PM by josh »
Logged

REDSTATEWARD

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 5939
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20665 on: September 22, 2019, 08:03:20 PM »

   


The first is our plan’s environmental ambition. It calls for a carbon fee starting at $40 a ton and increasing annually at 5% above inflation. According to modeling by the research group Resources for the Future, if implemented in 2021 the plan would achieve 50% U.S. CO2 reduction by 2035, as compared with 2005 levels. It would also exceed the 2025 U.S. commitment under the Paris agreement by a wide margin.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-to-cut-emissions-without-wrecking-the-economy-11569184262
Logged

josh

  • Global Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 18995
    • View Profile
Logged
The day Richard Nixon failed to answer that subpoena is the day he was subject to impeachment because he took the power from Congress over the impeachment process away from Congress, and he became the judge and jury." ~Lindsey Graham

NeedsAdjustments

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3276
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20667 on: September 22, 2019, 09:29:05 PM »

   


The first is our plan’s environmental ambition. It calls for a carbon fee starting at $40 a ton and increasing annually at 5% above inflation. According to modeling by the research group Resources for the Future, if implemented in 2021 the plan would achieve 50% U.S. CO2 reduction by 2035, as compared with 2005 levels. It would also exceed the 2025 U.S. commitment under the Paris agreement by a wide margin.


https://www.wsj.com/articles/how-to-cut-emissions-without-wrecking-the-economy-11569184262

A carbon tax now endorsed by the Wall Street Journal.

That’s really showing those dumb libs the right way to respond to climate change.
Logged
"When you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that's a pretty good job we've done."  -  The impeached "president" on Feb 27, 2020

NeedsAdjustments

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3276
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20668 on: September 22, 2019, 09:32:06 PM »

The president’s defenders are rightly emphasizing the lack of evidence (so far) of any express quid pro quo tying vital aid to Ukraine to an investigation of Trump’s political opponents...



Obstruct, withhold evidence, then claim a lack of evidence as exoneration. Repeat.

If it’s all above board, allow the whistleblower complaint to be reviewed by Congress, as the law requires.
Logged
"When you have 15 people, and the 15 within a couple of days is going to be down to close to zero, that's a pretty good job we've done."  -  The impeached "president" on Feb 27, 2020

kiidcarter8

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 12267
    • View Profile
Re: Trump Administration
« Reply #20669 on: September 22, 2019, 09:34:23 PM »

https://www.cnn.com/2019/09/21/politics/senators-home-state-polling/index.html

And then there were 3

Unless maybe we get a West Wing moment and a last minute entry.

Dramaaaaa.......
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 1376 1377 [1378] 1379 1380 ... 4288