Print

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

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

[barton]

Dragged to church?  Abuse!

Seriously, I can sympathize with the petition that's out there to have all U.S. bishops resign.  If an institution seems corrupt enough, the solution often seems to be to wipe it clean and start over.  My wife is Catholic, and does stuff with the music program where she meets with young people.  They made her go to a series of workshops that exhaustively went over all the methods for not doing anything inappropriate.  She says they go to extremes that rob children of something they need for normal psychological development:  touch.  And, sometimes, the need for a one-on-one private conversation with a sympathetic adult.  That's forbidden now, too.  Everything must be done with the door open and a witness present.

When an innocent hug or touch on the shoulder becomes something charged with suspicion, there's something wrong with the world.  We are primates, and touch is vital to our emotional health.  This sort of sterile unfeeling outcome, where no one may touch anyone, is an ongoing part of the crime that these despicable priests committed.   May they rot in hell.

Not to be flippant but the Catholic Church could stand a few decades of women in leadership and the clergy were allowed to be human.

Indeed.  The Church is sadly locked into an ancient and mythological view of women that most other religious sects have abandoned.  Nor do most Catholics endorse it, AFAICT.  If you ask them why it is the way it is, they refer to the fact that Jesus selected only male apostles.  That's it.  It's a mystery.  We don't know why that means women can't be ordained.  We must bow to the sacred mystery.  Even if it means demeaning and sidelining 51% of our members. 

[barton]

And don't tell me about coal jobs.  The number of people working in the US coal industry can barely fill one sports stadium.  Three times more people work in solar power in this country.

This is purely cultural (own those tree huggers!) and about rewarding political donors.

The energy industry is switching to natural gas and alternatives, regardless of what politicians do or say.  Clinton, at least, was honest enough to acknowledge the reality and offer a program to help coal miners retrain and find jobs.  Trump, trying to artificially prolong the death rattle of coal, is no friend of the coal miner and simply fed them lies and false hope.  Even China, which has been pretty blithe about soot-belching smokestacks around its cities, is moving away from coal.  The GOP is attempting to obliterate common sense and critical thinking.  Again.

[bankshot1]

From the observant here, what would downside to having women as priests?

And not to belittle tradition, but would a lot of those of faith quit the church if women were allowed to be ordained?

Would it rupture the church beyond repair?

Wouldn't it be an opportunity to reinvigorate the church?

Can it be given a test-run in certain select makets, or is that like a little bit pregnant?

[kiidcarter8]

On the VA front, just got a huge back-pay check totally unexpected. For all of his faults and sanity concerns the Donald has proven a huge improvement over BHO in helping the veteran and modernizing the system. No more daily scandals about veterans dying while awaiting care.

Absolute truth.

Better for the current soldiers and their morale as well.

[kiidcarter8]

And don't tell me about coal jobs.  The number of people working in the US coal industry can barely fill one sports stadium. Three times more people work in solar power in this country.

This is purely cultural (own those tree huggers!) and about rewarding political donors.

Maybe

But they dont need the help

[kiidcarter8]

How many solar power workers does it take to............

http://www.aei.org/publication/inconvenient-energy-fact-it-takes-79-solar-workers-to-produce-same-amount-of-electric-power-as-one-coal-worker/


It’s a common mistake of politicians and the media to treat jobs as an economic benefit, when in fact, jobs are an economic cost or price of production. As Milton Friedman explained nearly 40 years ago, the appropriate economic objective is to have the fewest number of workers producing the greatest amount of output. When it comes to solar energy, we are employing a very large number of workers who produce a very small amount of electric power – a sure sign of economic inefficiency.]It’s a common mistake of politicians and the media to treat jobs as an economic benefit, when in fact, jobs are an economic cost or price of production. As Milton Friedman explained nearly 40 years ago, the appropriate economic objective is to have the fewest number of workers producing the greatest amount of output. When it comes to solar energy, we are employing a very large number of workers who produce a very small amount of electric power – a sure sign of economic inefficiency.



heh

[josh]

With their new pollution plans concerning coal-fired power plants, Trump and Republicans continue the trend of allowing big money to privatize more of their gains while shifting more of the costs onto the public.

There is no way to justify this from the point of view of "free market" economics.  Its pure crony capitalism.  The scandal that was "Solyndra" but real.  And with the end result of more deaths, worse health, and life for regular people being generally shittier while execs pocket more profits.

Do they think people just won't notice?

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/08/21/climate/epa-coal-pollution-deaths.html

“Today’s proposal provides the states and regulated community the certainty they need to continue environmental progress while fulfilling President Trump’s goal of energy dominance,” Andrew Wheeler, the acting administrator of the E.P.A., said in a statement Tuesday.
...
The proposal lays out several possible pathways that individual states might use for regulating coal-fired power plants, and what the consequences would be for pollution and human health in each case. In the scenario the E.P.A. has pegged as the most likely to occur, the health effects would be significant.

In that scenario, the Trump E.P.A. predicts its plan will see between 470 and 1,400 premature deaths annually by 2030 because of increased rates of microscopic airborne particulates known as PM 2.5, which are dangerous because of their link to heart and lung disease as well as their ability to trigger chronic problems like asthma and bronchitis.

By contrast, the Obama administration’s central argument for its Clean Power Plan was that the measure protected human health as well as the climate. Specifically, it said, the plan would help avoid between 1,500 and 3,600 premature deaths annually by 2030.

Thanks, Trump.

[LarryBnDC]

From the observant here, what would downside to having women as priests?

And not to belittle tradition, but would a lot of those of faith quit the church if women were allowed to be ordained?

Would it rupture the church beyond repair?

Wouldn't it be an opportunity to reinvigorate the church?

Can it be given a test-run in certain select makets, or is that like a little bit pregnant?

We’re called Episcopalians...

The Catholic Church would experience a world wide upheaval considering the Church in a large part of Africa and South America is very conservative.

[josh]

On the VA front, just got a huge back-pay check totally unexpected. For all of his faults and sanity concerns the Donald has proven a huge improvement over BHO in helping the veteran and modernizing the system. No more daily scandals about veterans dying while awaiting care.

Absolute truth.

Better for the current soldiers and their morale as well.

I wonder if either of those will reflect in suicide rates, which continue to be considerably higher than in the civilian population.

I also wonder if it will impact the recruitment and retention rates.

Retention rates have already risen some, but recruitment is falling short to the point that the military lowered its goals. They continue to take some folks without even a high school diploma, despite stating that they won't lower their standards just because their numbers are lower than desired.

Mind you, the powers that be are trying to increase the size of the military because of the short cycle for returned soldiers who then get redeployed faster than in times past.

[bankshot1]

From the observant here, what would downside to having women as priests?

And not to belittle tradition, but would a lot of those of faith quit the church if women were allowed to be ordained?

Would it rupture the church beyond repair?

Wouldn't it be an opportunity to reinvigorate the church?

Can it be given a test-run in certain select makets, or is that like a little bit pregnant?

We’re called Episcopalians...

The Catholic Church would experience a world wide upheaval considering the Church in a large part of Africa and South America is very conservative.

I understand there would be a huge amount of blowback, but that's true of almost all social change.

Would the church in NYC or other large cities be able to accomodate that change?

Is the argument of "tradition" strong enough to maintain an anachronistic practice?

And over time, we all die, liberal and conservatives, and new generations might adapt to new church doctrines.

[bankshot1]

Cohen and a plea deal?

Manafort decison coming down?

Somebody's gonna hurt somebody before the night is through
Somebody come come undone, and there's nothing we can do

There gonna be a tweet storm tonight, a tweet storm tonight, I know,

Lord I know

[NeedsAdjustments]

How many solar power workers does it take to............

http://www.aei.org/publication/inconvenient-energy-fact-it-takes-79-solar-workers-to-produce-same-amount-of-electric-power-as-one-coal-worker/


It’s a common mistake of politicians and the media to treat jobs as an economic benefit, when in fact, jobs are an economic cost or price of production. As Milton Friedman explained nearly 40 years ago, the appropriate economic objective is to have the fewest number of workers producing the greatest amount of output. When it comes to solar energy, we are employing a very large number of workers who produce a very small amount of electric power – a sure sign of economic inefficiency.]It’s a common mistake of politicians and the media to treat jobs as an economic benefit, when in fact, jobs are an economic cost or price of production. As Milton Friedman explained nearly 40 years ago, the appropriate economic objective is to have the fewest number of workers producing the greatest amount of output. When it comes to solar energy, we are employing a very large number of workers who produce a very small amount of electric power – a sure sign of economic inefficiency.



heh

You take a fact that you can’t dispute, then apply it to a completely irrelevant argument…

It is Trump who speaks about “saving” the coal industry primarily in terms of jobs.  The fact I cited, that the American Enterprise Institute does not dispute, is that there are in fact not that many coal jobs, and there are more jobs in energy industries that are not being outmoded due to valid concerns about health and environmental impacts.

As to the argument made by the AEI here, there is a simple response…so?  Does the fact that there are more workers in an industry that is producing less power mean those workers are paid less, and therefore the jobs not as valuable?  I don’t see the AEI making that argument.  Nor do I see them make the argument that the “inefficiency” the speak to here is what is driving solar’s higher but declining costs. 

Solar power is a new industry, requiring labor resources for building up an infrastructure that coal-powered plants do not.  I would also imagine much of the labor involved in Solar is R&D related, a large portion of that tasked with making solar more efficient and less expensive.  I wouldn’t say that’s a bad thing.

I imagine without getting too far into this that AEI’s comparison has any number of real statistics related flaws because its AEI and they have a longstanding anti-environment agenda that is  funded by climate change deniers and oil companies (Donors Trust, described here https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2013/feb/14/funding-climate-change-denial-thinktanks-network are, by far, their largest donor] but even taking the given statistics at face value this argument is meaningless.

[Hamilton Samuels]

The fact that the President of the United States could spend that much time providing that much quote on the situation without once even mentioning White Supremacists (let alone condemning them) is extraordinarily bad.  Its a horror show.  And sorry, the only way you can not see that is if you sympathize with those White Supremacists.

I think the Devil's cleverest trick (aside from the classic one of convincing everyone that he doesn't exist) is rebranding
White Supremacists as the "Alt Right."  Putting "Alt" in front of something makes it sound trendy and cool and a refreshing alternative to the usual ideological menu picks. 

Banks - I'll address this to you, as you the seem like the saner person in the dispute:  any chance you and Nutley could PM each other?  And JOSH:  what are you good for, Global Moderator?  Can't you delete off-topic flame posts?

Josh chose sides many years ago. It's a Boston thing.

Josh chooses sides every single time you (a) try to talk about somebody's off-board identity and (b) get into your bogus shit on pedophilia.

The rest of the time, I feel no more strongly about your BS than anybody else's including my own. You're not the only person to have brought up people's real names and I jumped all over them, too. But you are too caught up in your own persecution complex to be able to understand that.

  Banks gave his own county up earlier today. Don't put that shit on me. And you know as well as anyone that he has had NUMEROUS CHANCES to move forward and bury the hatchet. But he can't do that, because he is obsessed with trying to "even the score".

He can't. So, to be truthful, again, as I always am...

I am not feeling persecuted.

All I did this past few days is to bring to the fore what you and many on the left hate---being exposed for doing the same things they accuse others of doing. You and others say you hate how Trump and the GOP demonize and practice the politics of personal destruction---"Crooked Hillary", "Lying Comey", and yet, you and others--and your defenders---- feel you can just label anyone who disagrees with you politically as a Nazi, a white supremacist, a racist, a bigot, and one who is being fitted for a brown shirt.

Do you actually think I CARE what anyone "here" thinks of me personally? Then you really don't know me very well.

Do you actually think that ANYONE "here" is who they really truly are "off-board"?

You CANNOT be serious! You CANNOT be that naive.

People here call me on my shit---many times rightfully so---and it doesn't bother me. When I do the same, they take deep offense.

Do a search on the phrase "Go fuck yourself", and see whose name comes up the most.

Then ask yourself if you are doing a good job monitoring the discussion.

Do the same with "Nazi" or "brown shirt".

I'd say most here need to develop a thicker skin---or play a different game.

And you, sir, should either take you title seriously,  so that others do, or admit that you are a MINO---Moderator in Name Only.

a) You are not even remotely always truthful. (Not that you are unique in that regard.)
b) You have posted his real name and threatened to post mine, posting a picture of me. No excuse.
c) Burying a hatchet is a thing that can be done unilaterally. Indeed, you have committed to do so on more than one occasion. That you blame others for your actions is typical, not only of you but of many people. But the whole "you made me do it" cant is bullshit. YOU control your own actions, not me and not Bankshot. Oddly enough, this part of the exchange is something you and I have had before.
d) Largely, I am moderator in name only. I have the ability to delete posts or edit them. I have the ability to move or create topics. Maybe lock them - haven't tested it. There are a couple other "powers" that I have, but in terms of moderation they don't amount to a hill of beans.
Howevere (e) My being Moderator in Name Only has nothing to do with your BS - your posts are out of line far more than anybody else's, no matter how many times other people tell you to fuck off or eat shit. You have earned any warning you have received (not from me, but from our owner/admin). You are more uncivil more often than anybody else here - and that takes work.
f) My job as moderator is not to keep my opinions to myself, even though both you (currently) and Red (always) seem to think that's the job.

And as ever, Utley, if you don't approve of the job I am doing, you are welcome to complain to the Admin about it. I am sure Liq will be terribly sympathetic to your plight, poor baby.

Thank you for your lengthy response. I will ignore the half truths and mischaracterizations which are contained within.

You have clarified your position, which is take no position.

Back to politics of the nation, not the pithiness here.

[Hamilton Samuels]

http://www.patheos.com/blogs/progressivesecularhumanist/2018/08/catholic-league-on-predatory-priests-its-not-rape-if-the-child-isnt-penetrated/

The Bill Clinton defense.

[Hamilton Samuels]

From the observant here, what would downside to having women as priests?

And not to belittle tradition, but would a lot of those of faith quit the church if women were allowed to be ordained?

Would it rupture the church beyond repair?

Wouldn't it be an opportunity to reinvigorate the church?

Can it be given a test-run in certain select makets, or is that like a little bit pregnant?

What's the big deal of allowing equal gender access to the Wailing Wall in Jerusalem?