5 replies to this topic

[Shortpoet-GTD]

They say they want smaller government, but these policies make it bigger and more
complicated.
http://grist.org/pol...he-environment/

[Dustoffer]

Tougher emissions rules dividing Democrats

By  Reid Wilson, Published: June 1

"The regulations, aimed at combating a rapidly changing climate by implementing state-by-state limits on greenhouse-gas emissions, will shine a spotlight on a growing division within the Democratic Party: On one side are major donors, who take a particular interest in environmental causes and are becoming increasingly important to the party. On the other are candidates from energy-producing states — where regulations on coal-fired power plants could have the most detrimental effects — whose fates will decide control of the Senate."
http://www.washingto...abcf_story.html

I read where 72% of Republicans approve of the EPA lower CO2 for coal power plants, and at least over 42% are "green".
The Democrats are all for amnesty for 30 million illegals and more gross immigration with no regard to 53 million Americans out of work, and millions more under-employed.  More overpopulation=more emissions, duh!
The sector of politics that is bad, even evil, is the country club rich corporate oligarchy who influence probably half of both parties.

Population MUST be reduced to real long term sustainable,  along with emissions by at least 90%, all in a decade or even less.
However, we'll never get there with an ignorant, misinformed, dumbed down, or uninformed population majority in a democracy.

[Dustoffer]

from another post, I wrote;
That is a tough one, finding out how they stand on rapid decarbonization and population reduction.
It isn't so simple as party lines.  42% of Republicans believe in science and perhaps have felt the change.
They are the ones who want the party to be green like it was with Teddy Roosevelt---the first real environmental President.
We should take the party back.  Reaganism was wrong.   Every President from Carter on have been in some way
against using power to start needed population control which includes closing the borders.  Nixon was the only President to address Congress on overpopulation.  He started the EPA, and Clean Water Act. LBJ started the ruin with unlimited immigration of non-historical peoples, and the forced growth only economy on us and the world with the elimination of social security individual accounts, which then went to the General Fund.  The democratic party of John Kennedy was more conservative than the republican party of today, and he wanted 'equal opportunity for equal qualifications', which then ended up as reverse discrimination, after he was killed.
The last really good President was him and Ike before him.  They did not know about overpopulation and its attendant malevolent climate change.  LBJ did, but was too stupid to draw the line between it and what he did to ruin the country over time.
Education of green subjects, ecology, nutrition, biology, and math have all suffered with the lowering average IQ.  They can't understand labels and are more likely to believe false advertising, IMEO.
Like the corruption and overpopulation it has spread like a cancer on this country.  Rampant law breaking in numerous ways, does not make it moral or legal.  Greed is no longer addressed as a moral/religious issue, and neither is unwed motherhood or stealing.
I know as a former teacher that it takes a certain intelligence to know all the green subjects, and most people do not have it, unfortunately for the biosphere.


This was somewhat the position of Reynolds and others at his symposium here a few days ago.  One woman said what I was talking about was the basis of the movie "Idiocracy".
However, it is not.  It really is a comedy, not the documentary it should be, because it is the awful truth that the LBJ immigration and affirmative Action have caused the dumbdown of 6 IQ points average since then---NOT EVEN HIGH ENOUGH on average, to get to be a journeyman tradesman in 10 years(96 IQ).

[Dustoffer]

Republican EPA Chiefs: No Excuse for Congressional Climate Inaction


Hearing meant to highlight some bipartisanship on EPA's new climate plan did more to expose the deep partisan divide over the issue.

By John H. Cushman Jr., InsideClimate News

Jun 18, 2014

Sen. John Barrasso of Wyoming, a Republican, speaks at an Environment and Public Works Subcommittee hearing on Tuesday. At the hearing, four former Republican EPA adminstartors told Congress that it must step up to the responsibility of tackling climate change. Credit: C-Span
"By inviting four former Republican heads of the Environmental Protection Agency to testify in favor of prompt climate change action, Democrats on a Senate committee hoped to highlight some degree of bipartisan support for the EPA's crackdown on carbon emissions from power plants.
The four duly defended the agency and disputed the notion that air pollution regulations are harmful to the economy. They also declared their acceptance of the established science on man-made global warming as an increasingly compelling reason to cut emissions."
http://insideclimate...limate-inaction

42% green republicans and 58% green democrats, with the rest just pandering to anti-environmental causes.  _____?
I know anti-environmental democrats and anti- environmental republicans, and some pro-environmental from both parties.  The sad fact is that at least half of our gov't, both parties and independents, is corrupt.
Big businesses of various kinds, big fossil fuel, and big growth only, infinite Earth special interests, like LaRaza, or the Chamber of Commerce.  We the people have a smaller voice, which is, well, un-American!

[Dustoffer]

Here is an article from a guy who really lives in a cubicle;


The Loneliness of the Non-Crazy Republican

June 22, 2014 11:31 am

"Hank Paulson has a very sad opinion piece about climate change in today’s Times. We must act, he declares, in the same way we acted to contain the financial crisis.
It’s a dubious analogy: the 2008 crisis was fast-moving, and people like Paulson could credibly warn that unless we acted the whole world economy would fall apart in a matter of days. Meanwhile, climate change is slow but inexorable, with enormous momentum; by the time it becomes undeniable that there’s a crisis, it will be too late to avoid catastrophe.
But that’s not the sad part about Paulson’s piece; no, what’s sad is that he imagines that anyone in the party he still claims as his own is listening. Earth to Paulson: the GOP you imagine, which respects science and is willing to consider even market-friendly government interventions like carbon taxes, no longer exists. The reins of power now rest firmly, irreversibly, in the hands of men who believe that climate change is a hoax concocted by liberal scientists to justify Big Government, who refuse to acknowledge that government intervention to correct market failures can ever be justified"
What a bunch of hogwash!  42% of Republicans are green conservationist conservatives, and over 63% of us approve the emissions cuts.  The oped creep thinks all are denialists.  There are also creep liberals all for overpopulation and/or exploiting the environment for money and overlooking pollution for campaign or other funds.
The really bad ones are in both parties---the country club corrupt politicians in alliance with corporations or special interest groups and not "we the people" as a whole.   They make over half of our elected officials, and have an active media supported corporate/corrupt politics cabal, on the lines of an oligarchy, built on greed and lust for power, with delusions of righteousness.
They want the growth only economy forced on the world by LBJ taking social security individual accounts and putting it in the General Fund.  Infinite Earthers, or Elitists with underground fortresses.

http://krugman.blogs...azy-republican/
http://grist.org/new..._campaign=daily
http://www.salon.com...arming_is_real/
http://dirtyenergymo...type=politician

The denialist RINOs will get booted out, and hopefully the elected will reflect the electorate

[Dustoffer]

A couple more ignorant articles on republicans in general being the anti-evolution and denialist ignoramuses, both in Skeptical Science, today.  Here is what we have, IMHEO;
58% of Republicans are denialist buffoons while only around 30% of dems are the same.
But 60% of dems want to allow felony violations and give 30-40 million illegals unearned citizenship in an overcrowded land, along with over 1.5 million immigrants per year, a denial of known gross 40 year+ overpopulation.
I am for forced emissions and population control (with NO immigration), along with higher death rates from 3 time burglars on up, and NO benefits for anyone who has not earned them through work of long tenure.  Let people starve, that is what happens in overpopulation.
Anything to reduce emissions enough and start overpopulation back to sustainable long term. All within a decade......