-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
- Status
Ok since you clearly have no rebuttal or are are even willing to consider offering an alternative explantion for all that I just took the time to present to you, I'm going to toss you into the same pile as all the other worthless trump supporters who can't defend their master so they dodge, make jokes, or change the subject.
And now today, the white house wont even say whether or not trump thinks climate change is a hoax.
As if it's nobody's business whether or not the leader of the country believes alt right conspriacy wackjobs instead of scientists.
If you're going to be a moron, at least have the courage to stand behind your own stupidity.
As if it's nobody's business whether or not the leader of the country believes alt right conspriacy wackjobs instead of scientists.
If you're going to be a moron, at least have the courage to stand behind your own stupidity.
AndrewTX
Member
You are forgetting the #1 rule of posting on Internet forums: don't feed the troll.
there is no comments that I would make because all that you presented is unsubstantiated innuendos. if even one thing that you offered is accurate I think that people who know a wee bit more than you would be all over it. If you have solid credible info that can be proven I've pointed you towards one of the most powerful member of the house who would relish the chance to be the one to destroy trump. go for it.
I know. I'm just really hoping to encounter a trump supporter who can intelligently explain their perspective and offer their interpretation of the russian scandal. They always seem to just say "well he won!" or "well obama...." or some other dodge or joke. I'm starting to think trump really doesn't have any intelligent supporters.
No I presented a list of objective facts. Dots that may or may not be connected. If you can refute any of them, please do. Otherwise, you can either choose to believe the highly unlikely scenario where it's just an incredible string of coincidences, or you can use your brain and realize that something is likely being hidden.
I'm Canadian and a huge fan of America, but I just can't understand how Trump still has a support base.
You just proved post #215. You can't defend or explain his actions, so you resort to dodging with some stupid joke or deflection.
Schiff already has all this information, and so would you if you got your news from real sources. I'm looking for a trump supporter capable of offering an intelligent defense or explanation for it. Guess I'll have to keep looking.
What is happening in the US right now?
The European press blames President Trump for the last action, but hey, they always do.
Then as well: He was elected. What does the majority of Americans think about the last move?
I'm asking, because in Germany some similar things happened: We had that diesel-gate! And what did our government do for our people here? They loosed the emission limits, so that the industry could do it again and pollute even more people - legalized. A lot citizens got angry and did there own energy transition. But that's nothing you can read about in the news and it might not represent the majority of the citizens.
Now, of all countries, the USA are on the way to leave the Paris climate goals.
That leaves us with some questions:
Are we as humanity on the edge of rescuing ourselves from the climate threat (doubters look at the bottom)*, or aren't we willing enough to get there?
Now comes the hard part:
If you're one of the people who blame our leaders for their actions, what means in the US, to blame President Trump, for quitting. Then the first step is done. But don't use this as an excuse to do nothing and lean back. If we get down the road of catastrophic outcomes through climate change, then we were in that boat together and did nothing then point fingers!
Is the President quitting, or is he simply doing, what people want him to do?
IF we really want a better future, for us and our kids, then we have to ask ourselves, what we as individuals can do NOW, to hold the commitments from Paris?
Change simply can't be ordered by politicians, it has to come from the people and only from the people!
There are a lot ways to influence the politicians without asking them.
What about:
Today is a good day, to do the right thing! Because we simply need to.
From what our world is struggling in the last years, I get more and more the feeling, that thinking in countries and borders is a terrible limitation of our potential as humanity. We all live on the same small planet and if it goes down, our nationality won't help us.
Know, that we all struggle in our countries (even in Germany and France) with hurdles to take, to get the better, cleaner, peaceful world that we need so desperately.
So, let's hope that the European politicians let there big mouth today follow actions and that for the American people, it gets better as fast as Ludicrous Mode.
And for all here with money left, who didn't pull the trigger:
Teslas products are one good way to spend it! Now!
Bless you.
-------------------------
*A.Schwarzenegger Test for Climate change doubters: "I have a final question, and it will take some imagination. There are two doors. Behind Door Number One is a completely sealed room, with a regular, gasoline-fueled car. Behind Door Number Two is an identical, completely sealed room, with an electric car. Both engines are running full blast. I want you to pick a door to open, and enter the room and shut the door behind you. You have to stay in the room you choose for one hour. You cannot turn off the engine. You do not get a gas mask. I'm guessing you chose the Door Number Two, with the electric car, right? Door number one is a fatal choice - who would ever want to breathe those fumes? This is the choice the world is making right now. It doesn't matter to me which of us is right about the science.I just hope that you'll join me in opening Door Number Two, to a smarter, cleaner, healthier, more profitable energy future."
The European press blames President Trump for the last action, but hey, they always do.
Then as well: He was elected. What does the majority of Americans think about the last move?
I'm asking, because in Germany some similar things happened: We had that diesel-gate! And what did our government do for our people here? They loosed the emission limits, so that the industry could do it again and pollute even more people - legalized. A lot citizens got angry and did there own energy transition. But that's nothing you can read about in the news and it might not represent the majority of the citizens.
Now, of all countries, the USA are on the way to leave the Paris climate goals.
That leaves us with some questions:
Are we as humanity on the edge of rescuing ourselves from the climate threat (doubters look at the bottom)*, or aren't we willing enough to get there?
Now comes the hard part:
If you're one of the people who blame our leaders for their actions, what means in the US, to blame President Trump, for quitting. Then the first step is done. But don't use this as an excuse to do nothing and lean back. If we get down the road of catastrophic outcomes through climate change, then we were in that boat together and did nothing then point fingers!
Is the President quitting, or is he simply doing, what people want him to do?
IF we really want a better future, for us and our kids, then we have to ask ourselves, what we as individuals can do NOW, to hold the commitments from Paris?
Change simply can't be ordered by politicians, it has to come from the people and only from the people!
There are a lot ways to influence the politicians without asking them.
What about:
- Asking every homeowner to install photovoltaic?
- If you are lucky enough, to have a home that's already sun-powered: Installing the Powerwall you ever dreamed of?
- Reserving your Model 3?
- Eating more organic and buy stuff more regional?
- Trying to avoid plastic waste?
- ......
Today is a good day, to do the right thing! Because we simply need to.
From what our world is struggling in the last years, I get more and more the feeling, that thinking in countries and borders is a terrible limitation of our potential as humanity. We all live on the same small planet and if it goes down, our nationality won't help us.
Know, that we all struggle in our countries (even in Germany and France) with hurdles to take, to get the better, cleaner, peaceful world that we need so desperately.
So, let's hope that the European politicians let there big mouth today follow actions and that for the American people, it gets better as fast as Ludicrous Mode.
And for all here with money left, who didn't pull the trigger:
Teslas products are one good way to spend it! Now!
Bless you.
-------------------------
*A.Schwarzenegger Test for Climate change doubters: "I have a final question, and it will take some imagination. There are two doors. Behind Door Number One is a completely sealed room, with a regular, gasoline-fueled car. Behind Door Number Two is an identical, completely sealed room, with an electric car. Both engines are running full blast. I want you to pick a door to open, and enter the room and shut the door behind you. You have to stay in the room you choose for one hour. You cannot turn off the engine. You do not get a gas mask. I'm guessing you chose the Door Number Two, with the electric car, right? Door number one is a fatal choice - who would ever want to breathe those fumes? This is the choice the world is making right now. It doesn't matter to me which of us is right about the science.I just hope that you'll join me in opening Door Number Two, to a smarter, cleaner, healthier, more profitable energy future."
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
I live in a rural area that is overwhelmingly Republican, and while the people here are not sophisticated, well educated, or informed by science, they are also not evil.
My impression is that for whatever reason they trust pale skinned Republicans. Everything else is noise that they are happy to ignore since it boils down to a she said/he said they cannot parse.
BluestarE3
Active Member
This isn't even counting the many grassroots efforts that have been in existence for a long time, but take a look at this immediate response to the announcement:
In response to US pulling out of Paris Agreement, US states, cities commit to protecting the environment and their citizens
After all, the guy's supporters purport to be proponents of States' Rights and curtailing the reach of the Federal government, correct? Hopefully, the irony is not lost on some people.
In response to US pulling out of Paris Agreement, US states, cities commit to protecting the environment and their citizens
After all, the guy's supporters purport to be proponents of States' Rights and curtailing the reach of the Federal government, correct? Hopefully, the irony is not lost on some people.
SageBrush
REJECT Fascism
Overall, Americans are a dangerous mixture of ignorance, stupidity, self-confidence, laziness and self serving hypocrisy. In those respects trump is their true leader.
I think a lot of it has to do with never wanting to admit you were wrong. If you voted for trump, you NEED to deny the russia situation, because to do otherwise would be admitting you got conned by a con man.
And comey is a white republican. So it's a he said/he said situation where they have to pick whether they trust white republican trump more than white republican comey. I saw a funny interview on the news where a trump supporter was asked "Do you beleive trump or comey?" and they said trump. They were then asked "Would you rather buy a used car from trump or comey" and they answered Comey. So they don't really trust trump, they're just cant admit that they got conned. People are prideful.
mspohr
Well-Known Member
Lots of people in the US are upset about Trump pulling out of the Paris agreement.
Most people in the US want to stay in the agreement.
Our political system has been corrupted by fossil fuel money (Koch, Exxon, etc.)
Lots of grass roots activism sparked by this idiot move.
US states (California, New York, Washington) are pledging to stay in the agreement. (In the US, the states have a lot of autonomy.)
The transition to renewables is well under way and now has strong economic backing... renewables are cheaper than fossil fuels.
Lots of corporations are also moving to renewables for economic as well as PR reasons.
As a technical matter, the US can't leave the agreement until November 2021 (after the next election) so this move has no practical effect except to upset everyone and mobilize them for action.
Yeah lots of people are all over it. Watergate took years to figure out what happened. Saying "nothing to see here" simply because YOU haven't been shown the evidence is really childish.
BY:
BEN SHAPIRO
JUNE 2, 2017
On Thursday, President Trump made the first major move of his administration since the appointment of Judge Gorsuch to the Supreme Court: he withdrew from the Paris Accord, a non-treaty entered into by President Obama that committed the United States to serious economic deprivation in order to accomplish nearly nothing in terms of climate change. It’s true that Trump laid all that out in a well-written, fact-laden speech. The Left predictably went nuts — they’ve been lighting up buildings green (wasting energy) and quitting his economic council (who cares) and tweeting incessantly about the end of the world all day.
But Trump is right.
Here are five reasons why.
1. The Accord Was A Treaty, And President Obama Refused To Treat It Like One. President Obama joined the Paris Accord shortly before leaving office, but never sent the agreement to the Senate for ratification. There was good reason for that: it wouldn’t have been ratified. Instead, Obama simply assumed that America would now be bound by requirements to tamp down carbon emissions in serious ways. In his statement ripping Trump for pulling out of the agreement, for example, Obama stated, “the world came together in Paris around the first-ever global agreement to set the world on a low-carbon course and protect the world we leave to our children.” But none of that was true. Which meant that the accord was essentially symbolic, but would create a bevy of headlines about America abandoning global leadership every time we didn’t meet an arbitrary line not approved by the American people.
2. There Were Legal Implementation Problems With The Paris Accord. Donald McGahn, the White House counsel, spelled out that courts could theoretically use the Paris Accord to strike down Trump’s attempted rollback of carbon emissions regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency. The Left claimed that this was empty talk — no enabling legislation regarding the Paris Accord had been signed, so it was symbolic. But these are the same people who now say the world will burn up because we’ve pulled out of the accord, and the same people who think the courts should ignore law in order to strike down executive orders they don’t like.
3. It Would Have Had No Impact. Obama himself says, “The private sector already chose a low-carbon future.” So if that was true, what’s the need for governmental cram-downs, exactly? Beyond that, Trump is correct that MIT has estimated that even if the Paris Accord were implemented with current commitments by the various countries, the global climate would be lowered by a grand total of 0.2 degrees Celsius by the year 2100. Meanwhile, we’d put crippling regulations on our economy. MIT and the Left insist that other steps would follow the Paris Accord — but there’s no evidence of that.
4. It Let Other Countries Free-Ride. Obama said in his petulant statement, “It was bold American ambition that encouraged dozens of other nations to set their sights higher as well.” This is absolute nonsense. One of the reasons to be skeptical of the Paris Accord is that it asked nations for non-binding commitments on climate change. Non-binding. As Oren Cass pointed out at Commentary:
China committed to begin reducing emissions by 2030, roughly when its economic development would have caused this to happen regardless. India made no emissions commitment, pledging only to make progress on efficiency—at half the rate it had progressed in recent years. Pakistan outdid the rest, submitting a single page that offered to “reduce its emissions after reaching peak levels to the extent possible.” This is a definition of the word “peak,” not a commitment. ... An April report by Transport Environment found only three European countries pursuing policies in line with their Paris commitments and one of those, Germany, has now seen two straight years of emissions increases. The Philippines has outright renounced its commitment. A study published by the American Geophysical Union warns that India’s planned coal-plant construction is incompatible with its own targets. All this behavior is socially acceptable amongst the climate crowd. Only Trump’s presumption that the agreement means something, and that countries should be forthright about their commitments, is beyond the pale.
5. It Put America Last. Obama and the Left have claimed for years that “green jobs” will be produced by government. There is no evidence of that happening. It’s a chimera. Van Jones, Obama’s “green jobs czar,” couldn’t point to any job creation for which he was responsible. We do know that additional regulations would cripple key industries in the United States without making up for them with these magical new “investments.” The private sector, as Obama recognizes, is already moving toward more efficient energy solutions. But this agreement wasn’t about forwarding that. It was about creating public pressure for the US government to intervene in its own economy, without requiring anything of those with whom we compete.
Good for Trump. The Paris Accord was a meaningless sham, designed mainly to shame the United States into harming its own economy for the vicarious pleasure of others.
BEN SHAPIRO
JUNE 2, 2017
On Thursday, President Trump made the first major move of his administration since the appointment of Judge Gorsuch to the Supreme Court: he withdrew from the Paris Accord, a non-treaty entered into by President Obama that committed the United States to serious economic deprivation in order to accomplish nearly nothing in terms of climate change. It’s true that Trump laid all that out in a well-written, fact-laden speech. The Left predictably went nuts — they’ve been lighting up buildings green (wasting energy) and quitting his economic council (who cares) and tweeting incessantly about the end of the world all day.
But Trump is right.
Here are five reasons why.
1. The Accord Was A Treaty, And President Obama Refused To Treat It Like One. President Obama joined the Paris Accord shortly before leaving office, but never sent the agreement to the Senate for ratification. There was good reason for that: it wouldn’t have been ratified. Instead, Obama simply assumed that America would now be bound by requirements to tamp down carbon emissions in serious ways. In his statement ripping Trump for pulling out of the agreement, for example, Obama stated, “the world came together in Paris around the first-ever global agreement to set the world on a low-carbon course and protect the world we leave to our children.” But none of that was true. Which meant that the accord was essentially symbolic, but would create a bevy of headlines about America abandoning global leadership every time we didn’t meet an arbitrary line not approved by the American people.
2. There Were Legal Implementation Problems With The Paris Accord. Donald McGahn, the White House counsel, spelled out that courts could theoretically use the Paris Accord to strike down Trump’s attempted rollback of carbon emissions regulations from the Environmental Protection Agency. The Left claimed that this was empty talk — no enabling legislation regarding the Paris Accord had been signed, so it was symbolic. But these are the same people who now say the world will burn up because we’ve pulled out of the accord, and the same people who think the courts should ignore law in order to strike down executive orders they don’t like.
3. It Would Have Had No Impact. Obama himself says, “The private sector already chose a low-carbon future.” So if that was true, what’s the need for governmental cram-downs, exactly? Beyond that, Trump is correct that MIT has estimated that even if the Paris Accord were implemented with current commitments by the various countries, the global climate would be lowered by a grand total of 0.2 degrees Celsius by the year 2100. Meanwhile, we’d put crippling regulations on our economy. MIT and the Left insist that other steps would follow the Paris Accord — but there’s no evidence of that.
4. It Let Other Countries Free-Ride. Obama said in his petulant statement, “It was bold American ambition that encouraged dozens of other nations to set their sights higher as well.” This is absolute nonsense. One of the reasons to be skeptical of the Paris Accord is that it asked nations for non-binding commitments on climate change. Non-binding. As Oren Cass pointed out at Commentary:
China committed to begin reducing emissions by 2030, roughly when its economic development would have caused this to happen regardless. India made no emissions commitment, pledging only to make progress on efficiency—at half the rate it had progressed in recent years. Pakistan outdid the rest, submitting a single page that offered to “reduce its emissions after reaching peak levels to the extent possible.” This is a definition of the word “peak,” not a commitment. ... An April report by Transport Environment found only three European countries pursuing policies in line with their Paris commitments and one of those, Germany, has now seen two straight years of emissions increases. The Philippines has outright renounced its commitment. A study published by the American Geophysical Union warns that India’s planned coal-plant construction is incompatible with its own targets. All this behavior is socially acceptable amongst the climate crowd. Only Trump’s presumption that the agreement means something, and that countries should be forthright about their commitments, is beyond the pale.
5. It Put America Last. Obama and the Left have claimed for years that “green jobs” will be produced by government. There is no evidence of that happening. It’s a chimera. Van Jones, Obama’s “green jobs czar,” couldn’t point to any job creation for which he was responsible. We do know that additional regulations would cripple key industries in the United States without making up for them with these magical new “investments.” The private sector, as Obama recognizes, is already moving toward more efficient energy solutions. But this agreement wasn’t about forwarding that. It was about creating public pressure for the US government to intervene in its own economy, without requiring anything of those with whom we compete.
Good for Trump. The Paris Accord was a meaningless sham, designed mainly to shame the United States into harming its own economy for the vicarious pleasure of others.
- Status
Similar threads
