Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
20 minutes ago, ruitxn said:

A lot going on today to discuss, but I have been pissed all day since reading this crap.

“The White House plans to create an ad hoc group of select federal scientists to reassess the government’s analysis of climate science and counter its conclusions that the continued burning of fossil fuels is harming the planet, according to three administration officials.  

The group would not be subject to the same level of public disclosure as a formal advisory committee.”

This kind of shit just drives me crazy.... We are bringing in real experts to support our non biased agenda, but we won’t allow questions or rebuff of our experts’ opinions.  Just suck it up and take it dummies.

https://epaper.statesman.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=55115d70-8509-4994-936a-7b4083b6ffd6&pbid=0bd3b62f-2574-4676-88da-58d1361460ab&utm_source=app.pagesuite&utm_medium=app-interaction&utm_campaign=pagesuite-epaper-html5_share-article

This is ri-goddam-diculous.  

Posted
1 minute ago, Chad Fuck said:

About 1/3 to 40% of people polled view Trump positively.  We know somewhere around 90% of Republicans view him positively.

So of all folks in the US, I'm going to say the number who would gladly see him as king, is somewhere between 1/3 and 40%.  

I said 1/3.  It could be 40%.  

ah, thank you for the clarification.  i read it as 1/3 of republicans.  perhaps i was reading too fast.  i think the point remains true, however, that probably 90%+ of people who self-identify as republicans today, if answering honestly, would love to have trump as dictator/king for life, with the ability to make up and have enforced, laws as he sees fit.

Posted
22 minutes ago, ruitxn said:

A lot going on today to discuss, but I have been pissed all day since reading this crap.

“The White House plans to create an ad hoc group of select federal scientists to reassess the government’s analysis of climate science and counter its conclusions that the continued burning of fossil fuels is harming the planet, according to three administration officials.  

The group would not be subject to the same level of public disclosure as a formal advisory committee.”

This kind of shit just drives me crazy.... We are bringing in real experts to support our non biased agenda, but we won’t allow questions or rebuff of our experts’ opinions.  Just suck it up and take it dummies.

https://epaper.statesman.com/popovers/dynamic_article_popover.aspx?guid=55115d70-8509-4994-936a-7b4083b6ffd6&pbid=0bd3b62f-2574-4676-88da-58d1361460ab&utm_source=app.pagesuite&utm_medium=app-interaction&utm_campaign=pagesuite-epaper-html5_share-article

And here's the actual link to the WaPo story.  The above link looks like it came from a 1994 geocities site or something.  Open incognito to avoid paywall.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/white-house-to-select-federal-scientists-to-reassess-government-climate-findings-sources-say/2019/02/24/49cd0a84-37dd-11e9-af5b-b51b7ff322e9_story.html?noredirect=on

 

Posted

The Pentagon scientists are the ones warning of climate change because they need to assess potential national security threats like population displacements and global instability in the years ahead. 

Trump administration: FAKE NEWS

  • Like 1
Posted

They're not even trying to hide it.  

Quote

The Federal Advisory Committee Act imposes several ground rules for such panels, including that they meet in public, are subject to public records requests and include a representative membership. The new working group, by contrast, would not be subject to any of those requirements.

 

Posted

Sums it up pretty well:

Quote

retired Rear Adm. David Titley, who served as oceanographer of the Navy and chief operating officer at the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, said the new initiative could imperil national security by clouding “truthful assessments of the risks stemming from a changing climate.”

“I never thought I would live to see the day in the United States where our own White House is attacking the very science agencies that can help the president understand and manage the climate risks to security of today and tomorrow,” said Titley, who sits on the advisory board of the Center for Climate and Security, a nonpartisan group focused on climate-related risks. “Such attacks are un-American.”

 

Posted
12 minutes ago, Biff Tannen said:

This is ri-goddam-diculous.  

It's fucking AWESOME.  It's as if Aggy put together a blue-ribbon panel of analysts....including Looch and 5 guys with super-duper ag-tags on Texags...to analyze the question of "is aggy the awesomest football program ever?"  

When your "working group" is LITERALLY defined by the conclusion you want them to reach, it ain't much of a working group.

  • Haha 1
Posted

When the science doesn't tell you what you want to hear, invent new science that you can use to support your own biased, previously held viewpoints. 

Posted
3 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

just a few decades late.  hopefully his bone spurs cooperate this time.

 

Imaging how much better off the world would be if he had died on the field like he should of decades ago.

Posted
19 hours ago, Gatorubet said:

From a state with idiots in Government, I must admit that I am impressed with the idiots that Texas elects.

I think Kansas could tell Texas and Florida to hold our beer if we were the same population size. EMAW!

I shudder to think of what Oklahoma or Alabama could do.

  • Like 1
Posted
2 hours ago, Chad Fuck said:

About 1/3 to 40% of people polled view Trump positively.  We know somewhere around 90% of Republicans view him positively.

So of all folks in the US, I'm going to say the number who would gladly see him as king, is somewhere between 1/3 and 40%.  

I said 1/3.  It could be 40%.  

I'd say 40% is a conservative estimate, no pun intended. John Oliver cited a poll last night that said 40% of Americans believe in psychics. We're a nation of idiots. 

Posted
43 minutes ago, Horn Dog said:

Imaging how much better off the world would be if he had died on the field like he should of decades ago.

Do they have any SAMs leftover from the war?

Posted
4 minutes ago, Eggo said:

Kai Ryssdal: " Do you think the President has a grasp of macroeconomics?"
Janet Yellen: "No, I do not."

Marketplace interviewed former Fed Chairman Janet Yellen and got her take on the POTUS's dumbassery. https://www.npr.org/podcasts/381444600/marketplace

Too bad 99.999% of people who listen to this already know that and agree. I don't see npr segments getting picked up on Fox news too often. 

Posted
2 hours ago, Biff Tannen said:

Sums it up pretty well:

“I never thought I would live to see the day in the United States where our own White House is attacking the very science agencies that can help the president understand and manage the climate risks to security of today and tomorrow,” said Titley, who sits on the advisory board of the Center for Climate and Security, a nonpartisan group focused on climate-related risks. “Such attacks are un-American.”

He hasn't been paying attention. This isn't a new idea. It's another step in the progression of the GOP's war on science. This is just one more way in which Dubya foreshadowed Trump. Trump is just turning it up to 11. 

This was published in 2005 and it still holds up:

41JOqu3xhKL._AC_SY400_.jpg

  • Like 1
Posted
59 minutes ago, WhatTheBuck said:

I'd say 40% is a conservative estimate, no pun intended. John Oliver cited a poll last night that said 40% of Americans believe in psychics. We're a nation of idiots. 

Agreed. It kind of makes you wonder what the other 60% think are going on at those tarot card reading places.

Posted (edited)

"If there is one thing we should all agree on, it's protecting the lives of innocent babies."

Then stop cutting welfare, you hypocritical fucking windbag.

Edited by TexArcher
  • Like 1
Posted
That’s not particularly novel. What makes it so dangerous is that he combines it with total ignorance. He knows absolute nothing about anything, and has zero desire to educate himself on any matter. Books? Borrrinnggg. Intelligence briefings? More pictures, less words. How the US government works? Hardly important for a President. 
When you refuse to be wrong about anything while simultaneously refusing any attempt to understand what is right, well, you come across like a fucking retard who Johnny Sack thinks is great.

Strange I read this hearing Bill Maher’s impression of Trump.
  • Like 1
Posted
17 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

Protect babies but put kids in cages.

Sounds Republican.

How else are they supposed protect them from their sex trafficking donors? 

  • Like 1
Posted
4 hours ago, Jhawkmvp said:

I think Kansas could tell Texas and Florida to hold our beer if we were the same population size. EMAW!

I shudder to think of what Oklahoma or Alabama could do.

Kensucky would win hands down.  They already got Rand and Turtle. 

 

Posted
1 hour ago, SubliminalHorn said:

Ok what is he talking about?

McConnell put up a partisan and heavy handed abortion bill for purely political reasons. The bill would make it a felony for any doctor that didn’t provide medical care to the fetus after a botched abortion. Most of what’s in the bill is already illegal and what isn’t - the bill overcharges as a felony. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/politics/senate-blocks-bill-on-medical-care-for-children-born-alive-after-attempted-abortion/2019/02/25/e5d3d4d8-3924-11e9-a06c-3ec8ed509d15_story.html?noredirect=on

Posted
8 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Kensucky would win hands down.  They already got Rand and Turtle. 

And they gave millions of dollars of tax incentives so Ken Ham could build his creationist Ark Encounter In their State. They're not about to let anyone out-ignorant them. 

Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, 4th&Five said:

 

Over/Under on number of abortions this asswipe has paid for?

I say 8 

Over please. 

Edited by ChiTownDoc
-110 on the price
Posted
22 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Kensucky would win hands down.  They already got Rand and Turtle. 

 

That's a huge head start.  Which states have voted to stop teaching evolution?  Pretty sure there's a few of those...at least been discussed in OK and KS. 

Posted
9 hours ago, High Plains Drifter said:

The irony is that Trump needs glasses, but he's too vain to wear them.

Well, he doesn't read and he's not bright enough to deploy the Rick Perry maneuver of don't these glasses make me look smart?  And then there's the obvious:

 

Melania Trump and Donald Trump
  

Posted
Over/Under on number of abortions this asswipe has paid for?
I say 8 
Over please. 


Honestly we should be thanking him for 8 less Eric’s and Don Jr’s in the world.
  • Like 3
  • Haha 1
Posted
6 minutes ago, Bama Chick said:

I WISH A MOTHERFUCKER WOULD
 

Eric might want to study up on actions taken by Kim Jong Un and Mohammed bin Salman with regard to family and start brainstorming.

 

Posted
5 hours ago, mdmost said:

When the science doesn't tell you what you want to hear, invent new science that you can use to support your own biased, previously held viewpoints. 

You know they are already setting up their own research/public policy organizations/think tanks so they can put out wrong information and reference their research centers to provide credibility.  Link this with Fox News and Sinclair and they'll bring back manufacturing, coal and whatever else they want you to believe.   

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.


×
×
  • Create New...