192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
blatham
 
  3  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 08:57 am
@revelette1,
Quote:
Donald Trump has selected retired Marine Gen. John Kelly to lead the Department of Homeland Security

For someone who knows more than the generals, he's sure cramming a lot of them into his administration. Why he's doing this isn't clear.

Damn near anyone would be better than Kobach in this post but watch to see whether Trump puts him in as Deputy Director.
McGentrix
 
  0  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 09:01 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

For someone who knows more than the generals, he's sure cramming a lot of them into his administration. Why he's doing this isn't clear.


Picking who he thinks is best person for the job I reckon.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 09:02 am
NY Times editorial on the Pruitt appointment to EPA
Quote:
This is an aggressively bad choice, a poke in the eye to a long history of bipartisan cooperation on environmental issues, to a nation that has come to depend on the agency for healthy air and drinkable water, and to 195 countries that agreed in Paris last year to reduce their emissions of climate-changing greenhouse gases in the belief that the United States would show the way. A meeting Monday between Mr. Trump and Al Gore had raised hope among some that the president-elect might reverse his campaign pledge to withdraw the United States from the Paris accord. The Pruitt appointment says otherwise.

Since becoming Oklahoma’s top legal officer in 2011, Mr. Pruitt has been a bitter opponent of the E.P.A., joining in one lawsuit after another to kill off federal environmental regulations. He has challenged standards for reducing soot and smog pollution that cross state lines. He has fought protections against mercury, arsenic and other toxic pollutants from power plants. He has sued to overturn an E.P.A. rule modestly enlarging the scope of the Clean Water Act to protect streams and wetlands vital to the nation’s water supply.
arsenic is nutritious
McGentrix
 
  0  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 09:06 am
@blatham,
Obama has wielded the EPA as a club and trump isn't going to have that. Different administration, different rules.
blatham
 
  4  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 09:22 am
After hackers infi
Quote:
ltrated the German Parliament’s computer network in May 2015, it took nearly a year before the country’s intelligence agency concluded that the attack was most likely the work of their Russian counterparts.

Last week, when 900,000 Germans lost access to internet and telephone services, it took a matter of hours before politicians began pointing fingers at Moscow.

Berlin is now concerned that Germany will become the next focus of Moscow’s campaign to destabilize Western democracies as national elections approach next year.

...The increasing dissemination of false news, disinformation and propaganda during the American campaign and before Italy’s referendum last weekend has added a related layer of worry about the potential to corrupt public debate and democratic processes.
link
The CIA, FBI and Intel agencies have all said that Russia is a responsible party in the American hacks. But Trump, in the Time interview, said he doesn't think Russia was involved and that those agencies might well be acting out of political motives.

So, what game is Trump playing here? So far as I know, he's still only attended two intel briefings thus he is either staying steadfastly uneducated in this matter because he's lazy or because he and many of those around him have ties to/in Russia and they don't want to risk losing some favor with Russia. What else could this be about?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 09:31 am
@McGentrix,
Quote:
Obama has wielded the EPA as a club and trump isn't going to have that.

I can't imagine you believe that Trump has even the foggiest notion of EPA regs put in place over the last eight years and costs/benefits of them? This isn't coming from him.

As to "Obama wielded the EPA like a club", that's a talking point metaphor without any informational value.
georgeob1
 
  1  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 09:46 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

As to "Obama wielded the EPA like a club", that's a talking point metaphor without any informational value.

I think everyone here will recognize your proficiency and vast experience in producing over inflated "talking point metaphors without any informational value". Indeed this technique is one of your rhetorical mainstays, and it is evident in a very lasrge fraction of your posts.

In the case at hand, the fact is the statement indeed does have significant "informational value". You are apparently, once again, ignorant of the salient facts.
=>Under Obama the EPA has administratively stretched the Clean Water Act by interpreting a phrase in the law, "The waters of the United States " , which under long-stasnding legal precedent included only the navigable rivers of the country, to include all streams and creeks feeding them and, a few years ago, even puddles appearing in a fearmers field after heavy rains or goound surface reconturing after someconstruction.

=> The Clean Air Act has been administratively interpreted as regulating natural CO2 (and recently Methane, CH4) resulting from animal respiration and flatulence, among other things) as toxic gases.

All of ths was done by administrative fiat, without any authorizing action by our legislature.
revelette1
 
  2  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 09:46 am
@Frugal1,
He was speaking of immigrants in this country. He said Mexico was not sending us their best, we get the rapist and murders.

Quote:
DONALD TRUMP: When do we beat Mexico at the border? They’re laughing at us, at our stupidity. And now they are beating us economically. They are not our friend, believe me. But they’re killing us economically.

The U.S. has become a dumping ground for everybody else’s problems.

Thank you. It’s true, and these are the best and the finest. When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people.

But I speak to border guards and they tell us what we’re getting. And it only makes common sense. It only makes common sense. They’re sending us not the right people.

It’s coming from more than Mexico. It’s coming from all over South and Latin America, and it’s coming probably— probably— from the Middle East. But we don’t know. Because we have no protection and we have no competence, we don’t know what’s happening. And it’s got to stop and it’s got to stop fast.


source

So I guess he thinks the kids of these rapist and murders are good people and we will find a way to keep them here.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  4  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:01 am
Related to the post above on Russia's hacking.
Quote:
Rep. Dana Rohrabacher (R-Calif.), who has emerged as a dark-horse pick for Donald Trump's secretary of state, tangled with a Yahoo News host Wednesday over whether Russia is a major human rights abuser. Rohrabacher's verdict: It's "baloney."


The exchange is pretty remarkable — in part because he was debating a Yahoo host who just happens to be from the former Soviet Union, but mostly because Rohrabacher seemed to dismiss long-standing and documented evidence of abuses in Russia. Rohrabacher seemed to take exception to Russia being mentioned in the same breath as China when it comes to human rights abuses.
WTF is going on hre?

And in the same piece, there's this...
Quote:
here's an exchange between Fox News's Tucker Carlson and Rep. Adam Schiff (D-Calif.), who is joining fellow Democrats in pressing for a House review of Russia's alleged meddling. Carlson presses Schiff hard, arguing that nothing has been proven and dismissing the intelligence community's allegations as its opinion.

This is how a nation moves into a post-truth, post-facts mode of thought. The US's policing and intelligence agencies conclusions are equal to the notions held by a Walmart greeter or Donald Trump. Just opinions.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  0  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:05 am
Lefties aint never seen a government regulation they don't like. These guys heading departments have their staffs working 24/7 to find something else to regulate.

Quote:
Politics is the art of looking for trouble, finding it whether it exists or not, diagnosing it incorrectly, and applying the wrong remedy. (Ernest Benn)


Trump aint goin for that. He's implementing a strict rule that, for every new regulation implemented, two old ones must be withdrawn. Big government is gunna get a haircut.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  0  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:14 am
@cicerone imposter,
You do realize most of the things this article talks about have come true?
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  4  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:16 am
@georgeob1,
georgeob1 wrote:

=> The Clean Air Act has been administratively interpreted as regulating natural CO2 (and recently Methane, CH4) resulting from animal respiration and flatulence, among other things) as toxic gases.


As greenhouse gases you mean, and they indisputably ARE greenhouse gases.
layman
 
  -1  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:18 am
@maporsche,
maporsche wrote:

georgeob1 wrote:

=> The Clean Air Act has been administratively interpreted as regulating natural CO2 (and recently Methane, CH4) resulting from animal respiration and flatulence, among other things) as toxic gases.


As greenhouse gases you mean, and they indisputably ARE greenhouse gases.


Yeah, so it H2O (water). So what?

"...resulting from animal respiration and flatulence, among other things) as toxic gases."

Eliminate cows! They're (gasp) TOXIC!
0 Replies
 
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:22 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

NY Times editorial on the Pruitt appointment to EPA

I can see in your quoted NY Times editorial piece some inspiration for your evident fondness for metaphors and frequant sweeping statements of little or no informational content, but far reaching deceptive potential. It is indeed very useful **** for the deceptive political rhetoric you both practice.

I really liked the bit about "... 195 countries that agreed in Paris last year to reduce their emissions of climate-changing greenhouse gases in the belief that the United States would show the way." In the first place few of these nations have made any serious efforts to comply with previous agreements (How well are you guys doing up in Alberta?) , and secondly their real expectations are quite unknowable, even to the NYT, and, whatever they may be, don't bind this country in any way.

The issues with arsenic, mercury and other toxic pollutants (most of which are ubiquitous in small quantities and naturally occurring), involve regulatory action limits, a very technical question that has many complicating factors including the mobility and reactivity of the molecules in question; the various biological uptake paths in humans; the accumulation (or absense of it) in the human body; and a host of other factors. EPA has recently taken to the issuance of action limits that in some cases are below the ability of even advanced laboratories to detect by any proven means. Go figure !

I recognize your lack of knowledge or even apparent interest in these technical details ( For both you and the NYT these details do take some of the flourish out of wanted rhetorical flights, and conflate desired simpolistic, uninformed "solutions" - very inconvenient.)

By the way organic arsenic is a component of most of the plant food you eat. It is nutritious, is redily excreted by the body and relatively harmpess. Facts are pesky things.
Baldimo
 
  -1  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:25 am
@maporsche,
You seem to have forgotten that the courts have overturned the overreaching EPA.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/246423-supreme-court-overturns-epa-air-pollution-rule
cicerone imposter
 
  2  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:26 am
@georgeob1,
http://mg.co.za/article/2014-11-18-agreement-to-reduce-greenhouse-gases-will-not-save-africa/
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:32 am
@georgeob1,

Quote:
=>Under Obama the EPA has administratively stretched the Clean Water Act by interpreting a phrase in the law, "The waters of the United States " , which under long-stasnding legal precedent included only the navigable rivers of the country, to include all streams and creeks feeding them and, a few years ago, even puddles appearing in a fearmers field after heavy rains or goound surface reconturing after someconstruction.

=> The Clean Air Act has been administratively interpreted as regulating natural CO2 (and recently Methane, CH4) resulting from animal respiration and flatulence, among other things) as toxic gases.

Golly. I'm having rather a tough time finding any sense at all in your suggestion that either of these (I'll just presume you describe them accurately) constitutes some horrifyingly oppressive reach by the agency tasked with protecting the environment.

Quote:
All of ths was done by administrative fiat, without any authorizing action by our legislature.

So what? We all understand the power of the energy industries in lobbying politicians who are aligned with their profit-taking goals. And aside from that, was Obama acting illegally or unconstitutionally here? If so, why has no court overturned his actions?
layman
 
  0  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:33 am
ISIS is runnin all over the middle east, gang-raping females from age 7 to 70. At this rate, the population increase will be unsustainable.

Not to fret, though. Once the Donald and his crew of generals take over, ISIS is toast.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:34 am
@maporsche,
Quote:
As greenhouse gases you mean, and they indisputably ARE greenhouse gases.

Yes. Which doesn't matter at all if a person holds that global warming is a hoax.
Baldimo
 
  0  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:37 am
@blatham,
They did.

http://thehill.com/policy/energy-environment/246423-supreme-court-overturns-epa-air-pollution-rule
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.47 seconds on 04/27/2024 at 09:40:49