• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

PoliGAF 2014 |OT| Kay Hagan and the Terrible, Horrible, No Good, Very Bad News

Status
Not open for further replies.

HylianTom

Banned
ebaf090938e3ab5c3e6380c224a44e38.jpg


Yup. That's our senator assisting with a kegstand at today's LSU tailgating festivities. That's gotta be worth a percentage or two, right?
 
ebaf090938e3ab5c3e6380c224a44e38.jpg


Yup. That's our senator assisting with a kegstand at today's LSU tailgating festivities. That's gotta be worth a percentage or two, right?

I love Louisiana sometimes. I miss it and NOLA soooo soooo much

LOL. Alright there buddy.

btw 1923 pledge of allegiance was the best:

"I pledge allegiance to the Flag of the United States and to the republic for which it stands; one Nation indivisible with liberty and justice for all."
I still say this. Not really because I don't believe in god (I'm not an atheist) but just because its more inclusive, it feels really sectarian to say the under god part
 

Wilsongt

Member
I swear, no Republican out of the current crop should be allowed anywhere near a committee involved with science, health, or technology.
 
I hate to be cynical, but it'll change absolutely nothing.
Immediately no. But it's about building a movement. I've had the chance to speak to mickibben when he came to my class. He's thinking longer term and see these as the marches on civil rights in the 50s.

They've made climate change a litmus test on the left and had successes locally and statewide.

He's a smart guy and gets how change happens in america. The biggest issues is there isn't a lot of time left.
 
They couldn't even get an extremely watered down cap and trade bill (Waxman-Markey) through the Democrat controlled Congress in 2009, and cap and trade was even in the GOP platform in 2008.

Nothing substantive will get done until we have like 2/3rds Dem majorities in both houses of Congress so we can ratify Kyoto and other climate change treaties.
 

Jooney

Member
They couldn't even get an extremely watered down cap and trade bill (Waxman-Markey) through the Democrat controlled Congress in 2009, and cap and trade was even in the GOP platform in 2008.

Nothing substantive will get done until we have like 2/3rds Dem majorities in both houses of Congress so we can ratify Kyoto and other climate change treaties.

Oh well then may as well give up until that happens.

They are there ahead of the UN climate conference. It's important that they are there in large numbers and making their voices heard, to provide legitimacy and urgency to the arguments calling for action.

Also, 2/3rd dem majorities will likely include blue dog democrats who have no interest in penalising polluters. This change has to come from the bottom.
 

benjipwns

Banned
"What do we want? Some kind of non-specific symbolic action! When do we want it? At some point in the near future but not too near you know..."
 
They couldn't even get an extremely watered down cap and trade bill (Waxman-Markey) through the Democrat controlled Congress in 2009, and cap and trade was even in the GOP platform in 2008.

Nothing substantive will get done until we have like 2/3rds Dem majorities in both houses of Congress so we can ratify Kyoto and other climate change treaties.
Obama has done a lot with the EPA

Also to the bolded, this isn't the GOP doesn't believe it anymore, its just a signal of partisanship, they're not in power so they can just be opposed to things. There are a lot of stupid GOP congressman but there have been since time immemorial, they can still do things like the EPA, Clean Water Act, etc when political acts pressure them to doing it. Just don't expect them to credit dems or claim what they are doing is the same thing.
 
They couldn't even get an extremely watered down cap and trade bill (Waxman-Markey) through the Democrat controlled Congress in 2009, and cap and trade was even in the GOP platform in 2008.

Nothing substantive will get done until we have like 2/3rds Dem majorities in both houses of Congress so we can ratify Kyoto and other climate change treaties.

Well there is a metric ton of stuff that the GOP supported which became toxic as soon as Obama suggested doing it.
 

Jooney

Member
Rockefellers, Heirs to an Oil Fortune, Will Divest Charity From Fossil Fuels

John D. Rockefeller built a vast fortune on oil. Now his heirs are abandoning fossil fuels.

The family whose legendary wealth flowed from Standard Oil is planning to announce on Monday that its $860 million philanthropic organization, the Rockefeller Brothers Fund, is joining the divestment movement that began a couple years ago on college campuses.

The announcement, timed to precede Tuesday’s opening of the United Nations climate change summit meeting in New York City, is part of a broader and accelerating initiative.

In recent years, 180 institutions — including philanthropies, religious organizations, pension funds and local governments — as well as hundreds of wealthy individual investors have pledged to sell assets tied to fossil fuel companies from their portfolios and to invest in cleaner alternatives. In all, the groups have pledged to divest assets worth more than $50 billion from portfolios, and the individuals more than $1 billion, according to Arabella Advisors, a firm that consults with philanthropists and investors to use their resources to achieve social goals.

The people who are selling shares of energy stocks are well aware that their actions are unlikely to have an immediate impact on the companies, given their enormous market capitalizations and cash flow.

Even so, some say they are taking action to align their assets with their environmental principles. Others want to shame companies that they believe are recklessly contributing to a warming planet. Still others say that the fight to limit climate change will lead to new regulations and disruptive new technologies that will make these companies an increasingly risky investment.

Ultimately, the activist investors say, their actions, like those of the anti-apartheid divestment fights of the 1980s, could help spur international debate, while the shift of investment funds to energy alternatives could lead to solutions to the carbon puzzle.

Good. And also glad to see people's activism paying off. Small steps.

edit: I believe that this is an initiative that Bill Mckibbon has spearheaded, keeping in line with what APKmetsfan was saying before about the long game.
 

alstein

Member
I want to do something about the environment, I just don't think cap and trade is the answer because I find the economic premise flawed when companies can just move it around. Also, I think the effects of a cap-and-trade system will trickle down to the poorest, and I'm more concerned about poverty than climate change.

The best answer is technology and incentives.
 
Is it because he shitcanned Detroit or any other reason?

Mainly Detroit.

Although part of me feels like we'd be better off if he won, solely because Shauer literally won't accomplish anything as governor due to the extremist GOP congress. Everything will stagnate and he'll be hung out to dry in four years.
 

Wilsongt

Member
I was listening to NPR in the car a bit ago and they were talking about a flood of Syrian refugees into Turkey that were fleeing violence and it got me to thinking.

Whenever you hear of a mass of people moving across borders in say Africa or the middle East they are always called refugees. However, when various new sources and pundits and politicians in America talk about the flood of children from Central America coming across our borders to flee violence, they are called illegal immigrants. Very rarely does the news call them refugees.

I just think it's fascinating how just changing up a single word completely changes the context of the situation immediately when they are essentially the same thing.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
I was listening to NPR in the car a bit ago and they were talking about a flood of Syrian refugees into Turkey that were fleeing violence and it got me to thinking.

Whenever you hear of a mass of people moving across borders in say Africa or the middle East they are always called refugees. However, when various new sources and pundits and politicians in America talk about the flood of children from Central America coming across our borders to flee violence, they are called illegal immigrants. Very rarely does the news call them refugees.

I just think it's fascinating how just changing up a single word completely changes the context of the situation immediately when they are essentially the same thing.

One usual difference is that war refugees don't necessarily have the intent of relocating to the target country, only to temporarily escape the combat/danger. That is largely different from US example where the children are often coming here to relocate and join family who are already here, and there is little if any desire to return.

I would be interested in knowing what the receiving countries think of the war refugees though. Does Turkish press, as the receiving location, look at them as refugees or immigrants?
 

benjipwns

Banned
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4Gj_aGV8Tg

omg

Judge Jeanine Pirro called the Islamic extremist group ISIS America’s “single biggest threat in her 200-year history" claiming that the threat was even bigger than those America faced during World War I, World War II, and September 11th. She predicted that ISIS will come to America, “if not already on American soil.”

Judge Jeanine: "Everything I’ve been telling you for a month is accurate. You need to think September 11th, 2001. You need to remember what it felt like then. Don’t sit there and think that government has you covered. Hell, the White House itself and its perimeter were penetrated twice in the last 24 hours."

"If our government were listening, our borders would be closed. If our government were listening, we’d be bombing ISIS nonstop. And if they were listening, our president would be following the advice of the military experts united on the issue of boots on the ground. But instead, our president thinks he knows more than the military experts, a disagreement highlighted this week and virtually unseen in American history. And if our government were listening, we would never have gotten out of Iraq the way we did."
 

Joe Molotov

Member
So who is gonna lead the fight against ISIS when our President is a known muslin?

If you watched the video, you'd know that you need to personally take up arms against Sharia creep, along with your family and your supplies, preferably in a bunker somewhere in the American southwest.
 

AndyD

aka andydumi
One usual difference is that war refugees don't necessarily have the intent of relocating to the target country, only to temporarily escape the combat/danger. That is largely different from US example where the children are often coming here to relocate and join family who are already here, and there is little if any desire to return.

I would be interested in knowing what the receiving countries think of the war refugees though. Does Turkish press, as the receiving location, look at them as refugees or immigrants?

As if on cue, BBC delivers:
http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-29316294

Mixed responses at best. And that's in part because the situation is volatile and Turkish troops are also restricting some travel into Syria to presumably prevent support for ISIS. This alone makes it a wholly different situation from the US one.
 
Brownback campaign in Kansas going all out on the attack that Paul Davis went to a strip club once in 1998 because Davis was representing the owner of the club in court.

Jesus fucking Christ Kansas.
 

Wilsongt

Member
Brownback campaign in Kansas going all out on the attack that Paul Davis went to a strip club once in 1998 because Davis was representing the owner of the club in court.

Jesus fucking Christ Kansas.

The RGA attacked the Dem here in South Carolina for being a defense attorney, also. It's not an unusual concept to attack.
 
Brownback campaign in Kansas going all out on the attack that Paul Davis went to a strip club once in 1998 because Davis was representing the owner of the club in court.

Jesus fucking Christ Kansas.
Kansas Republicans desperation continues

They also tried attacking Orman over a friend of his who ended up in prison and Orman handled his response like a boss. Just something like "he's a good friend of mine who did something very wrong, and now he's paying for it, everyone makes mistakes." It's refreshing to see that after so many "scandals" that end with the politician disassociating themselves completely with whoever they're being attacked over.
 
Mainly Detroit.

Although part of me feels like we'd be better off if he won, solely because Shauer literally won't accomplish anything as governor due to the extremist GOP congress. Everything will stagnate and he'll be hung out to dry in four years.
Does rest of the state feel the same way? I mean if he hadnt bailed on Detroit, he probably could coast his way to victory methinks.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
Brownback campaign in Kansas going all out on the attack that Paul Davis went to a strip club once in 1998 because Davis was representing the owner of the club in court.

Jesus fucking Christ Kansas.

The shit going down in Kansas is breathtaking to behold. A ruby red state like that, and Brownback has managed to turn 100 of his own Republican allies in the state legislature against him. How the hell do you fuck up like that?
 

gcubed

Member
The shit going down in Kansas is breathtaking to behold. A ruby red state like that, and Brownback has managed to turn 100 of his own Republican allies in the state legislature against him. How the hell do you fuck up like that?

By actually doing what you campaigned on doing.
 

Oblivion

Fetishing muscular manly men in skintight hosery
By actually doing what you campaigned on doing.

It really is stunning. Republicans have been adamant when it comes to supporting trickle-down economics at all costs. Even Republicans is less insane states like California or Massachusetts would sooner sacrifice their first born than raise taxes, and yet we have 100 fricken legislators in a state so conservative that even their local NAACP office has a confederate flag flying up front, have turned their backs on the teachings of the Lord Reagan.

It's arguably the most fascinating thing I've seen since I've been following politics.
 
It really is stunning. Republicans have been adamant when it comes to supporting trickle-down economics at all costs. Even Republicans is less insane states like California or Massachusetts would sooner sacrifice their first born than raise taxes, and yet we have 100 fricken legislators in a state so conservative that even their local NAACP office has a confederate flag flying up front, have turned their backs on the teachings of the Lord Reagan.

It's arguably the most fascinating thing I've seen since I've been following politics.
is there a place I can read up on all this?
 
So, like Pennsylvania every presidential election.
And Michigan and Minnesota.

You know, Democrats have pie-in-the-sky fantasies about Texas all the time, but there's rarely any serious analysis that doesn't immediately temper its expectations by saying like "Texas could be blue in 2024" or something. Romney campaign people expecting to win Pennsylvania on election night was kind of pathetic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom