192
   

monitoring Trump and relevant contemporary events

 
 
layman
 
  -1  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:39 am
@Baldimo,
Yet another unconstitutional over-reach by Obama, eh? Like, whooda thunk, I ask ya?
0 Replies
 
maporsche
 
  3  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:40 am
@Baldimo,
Baldimo wrote:

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


I didn't forget anything. What you posted has absolutely nothing to do with what I posted. That rule isn't even about greenhouse gas emissions, which are still very much regulated by the EPA.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  -1  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:41 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

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.


The co-founder and former head of Greenpeace insists that we need more, not less, CO2 in the atmosphere.
0 Replies
 
farmerman
 
  3  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:41 am
@georgeob1,
two side points

1The "navigble waters of the US" issue had been a joke since the Ford yars when "the outside possibility of a field trickle connecting with a navigble river " sefined the max cleanup stndrds. It predates anything Obama added to by several decades

2Im with you about toxicnts like Hg and As. We fdind Arsenic in any rock that contains PYRITE . So the EPA goes nd lowers the DWstandard for action levels to 10 ppb and the natural rock n ground water contains concentrtions to 25 and 30 ppb(AND IM SUPPOSED TO HAVE MY CLIENTS CLEANUP AFTER GOD). kinda pisses me off ( I still take some regs prsonally)

HOWEVER, on the balance , when waters are potentially affected by toxicants by human activity, a book should be available for throwing at the perps. If Trump backs off , his regime will find its ass in court by whole numbers of public interest groups.

In Pa were beginning to look at the differences in concentrations between AMBIENT and ANTHROPOGENIC. It involves more field work but , hey, we are an industry too.

georgeob1
 
  -1  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:42 am
@blatham,
These actiuons are relatively recent and Federal courts have indeed begun to limit their applicability. however the bureaucratic overreach continues : EPA is currently "studying" new regulatioins to limit bovine flatulence!

The clean water Act gives EPA the right to regulate the future use of any contaminated "water". People have literally lost the right to build on land they own because parts of it have become saturated with standing water as a result of nearby construction and drasinage changes. My company recently worked on a project to clean up a 100 yd long puddle that developed after construction operations on the south side of the eastern approaches of the new SF Bay Bridge. Instead of spending ! $20,000 just filling it in with dirt, several millions were spent in regulatory compliance nonsense and in creating a "permanent wetland" . It's a goddamn construction puddle, but bureaucrats don't understand that!
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:44 am
Winner of today's coveted "Well, uh, yeah" award
Quote:
Retired Army Gen. Barry McCaffrey has changed his opinion on the incoming national security adviser, retired Army Gen. Michael Flynn, after reading his tweets.

In an interview on NBC posted online Thursday, McCaffrey acknowledged that he had initially been supportive of Flynn after President-elect Trump announced that he would be his national security adviser, a position which does not require confirmation hearings.

“But I must admit,” McCaffrey said, “I’m now extremely uneasy about some of these tweets, which don’t sound so much as if they are political skullduggery, but instead border on being demented. So I think we need to look into this and sort our what’s going on here.”

“I think that we need to aggressively examine what was going on with Gen. Flynn and his son, dealing with these transparent, nearly demented tweets that were going out,” he continued. “I think it needs closer scrutiny.”
Dr Strangelove was here
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:47 am
@farmerman,
I agree in principle. However the legal meaning of the law and its likely intent when enacted by the Congress are quite clear. Our laws are made by the peoples representatives, not self appointed technocrats.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  3  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:52 am
As noted earlier
Quote:
In 2000 Donald Trump told Fortune magazine, “It’s very possible that I could be the first presidential candidate to run and make money on it.”


Quote:
RNC Will Reportedly Host Christmas Party At Trump DC Hotel
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/rnc-party-trump-hotel
And that's just one instance of many where this con man is raking in the dollars precisely through the vehicle of his presidency.
layman
 
  -1  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:55 am
@blatham,
Yeah, well, some people thought that great patriot, Gen. Jack D. Ripper, was "demented" too. But he wasn't no chump.

Quote:
Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous Communist plot we have ever had to face? Mandrake, do you realize that in addition to fluoridating water, why, there are studies underway to fluoridate salt, flour, fruit juices, soup, sugar, milk... ice cream. Ice cream, Mandrake, children's ice cream. Your Commie has no regard for human life, not even his own.

I can no longer sit back and allow Communist infiltration, Communist indoctrination, Communist subversion and the international Communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  -2  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:55 am
@blatham,
Man made global warming is a hoax. They don't even have a hold on their own science, it has changed theories enough over the last few decades. Global cooling, nope that didn't happen. Next came Global Warming and when that didn't start coming true it got switched again to just plain Climate Change, which is just a general overall cover for anything that will happen. Now you can't help but be right...

The climate has always changed and it will forever change. What do you think has driven evolution and adaption over the eons. If man was going to have a major impact on our planet and it's climate, it would have taken place during the 50's when the US and other countries were openly testing nukes and other such WMD's. The amount of **** released into the atmosphere I'm sure was amazing but we appear to be okay. For people who are "for change", why do you want to lock the planet into a stagnant state? You champion evolution yet you want to eliminate one of the very things that made it possible, the changing of the planet and the ability of life to change and or adapt to it's environment. Talk about the hubris of man.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  0  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 10:57 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

And that's just one instance of many where this con man is raking in the dollars precisely through the vehicle of his presidency.


That's right!
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  0  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 11:02 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:

Quote:
RNC Will Reportedly Host Christmas Party At Trump DC Hotel

Is that gunna be at taxpayers' expense, ya figure?
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 11:05 am
Rich Lowry would like you to think this is actually true
Quote:
In the course of a couple of tweets, Donald Trump may have ended the image of the GOP as the party of corporate America.

After striking a Carrier deal to preserve about 800 jobs from being sent to Mexico, the president-elect slapped the Indiana company Rexnord on Twitter for “rather viciously firing” its workers and then went after Boeing for ripping off the public on a $3 billion Air Force One deal.

Just like that, and in less than 280 characters, Trump had established more distance from Big Business than the GOP had in a generation.
The Incredible Power of Trump's Tweets
Yeah, fer shur. This is an administration shaping up to look like Donald himself, a real friend of the working stiff. No bankers, billionaires, or corporate allies anywhere to be seen. There really more like Bolsheviks, this crowd.

How about his pick for Labor? That ought to tell us something about his love for the working stiff.
Quote:
Trump’s Labor pick proves that he was never about the working class. Andy Puzder, the CEO of CKE Restaurants Holdings Inc., which owns fast food chains like Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s, is expected to be Trump’s pick to run the Department of Labor. It’s hard to think of someone who has been a worse advocate for workers over his career. Puzder consistently rails against raising the minimum wage, even to just $9 an hour, and advocates for rolling back regulations on corporations. He also opposed President Obama’s new overtime rules. When investigated by the DOL, more than half of Carl’s Jr. and Hardee’s restaurants examined had at least one wage and hours violation. And, according to Talk Poverty, Puzder makes more in one day than one of his minimum wage employees makes in an entire year.

If he could, Puzder would replace all those pesky human workers with robots anyways because, in his own words, robots are “always polite, they always upsell, they never take a vacation, they never show up late, there’s never a slip-and-fall, or an age, sex, or race discrimination case.”
A working class hero
layman
 
  0  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 11:09 am
@blatham,
blatham wrote:
Just like that, and in less than 280 characters, Trump had established more distance from Big Business than the GOP had in a generation.


Ya left this part out, eh?:

Quote:
Just like that, and in less than 280 characters, Trump had established more distance from Big Business than the GOP had in a generation. In his frenetic way, he is forcing a reorientation of the Republican Party’s economics, a change that is welcome in its broad contours, even if his methods are dubious and the potential pitfalls considerable.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 11:14 am
I am so in love with this woman
Quote:
But although she’s forging ahead, Fey still has regrets about Hillary Clinton’s loss. After a few weeks to think about why Clinton was defeated, Fey told the audience at The Hollywood Reporter’s annual Women in Entertainment breakfast that she finally had the answer.

“I promised myself I wouldn’t get up here today and talk about the election, because when I get written up in Breitbart, I want it to be because they’re mad that I’m making an all-female Hitler biopic,”
Tina Fey
0 Replies
 
Baldimo
 
  0  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 11:17 am
@blatham,
Are you really trying to insist that no modern day president has left the office richer than when he came into office? Forgive me if I'm wrong, but what was Obama's net worth prior to his 2004 DNC debut when he was just an IL state senator?
Quote:
2004: He earns a salary of $60,287 from the Illinois State Senate and $32,144 from the University of Chicago Law School, where he taught. The president also has assets in four financial funds worth between $50,000 and $100,000 each.


What is his current net worth?
Quote:
An analysis of Obama’s financial disclosure in 2015 showed a net worth between $2 million and $7 million, reported USA Today. Celebrity finance resource Celebrity Net Worth, however, reported that Obama’s net worth is as high as $12.2 million.

http://time.com/money/4439729/barack-obama-net-worth-55th-birthday/
Now granted we assume a portion of this is due to the sales of his books, but it does mention that he has investments. Investments? Was there ever any question about conflict of interests with Obama and the companies he has investments in? None that I have heard and none that I care about. The point is that EVERY president financially benefits from their time in office. If Trump does so in a way that breaks the law, then he should go down for it.
georgeob1
 
  -1  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 11:18 am
@blatham,
Well Trump hasn't mande any money yet on the Presidency. Indeed in a move very unlie those of his Democrat predecessors he actually paid for a large fraction of his campaign expenses out of his own funds. In addition he has announced hae won't take the ~$450K/year salary associated with the office.

Obama's fortunes have cartainly grown while he was in office. He went from very questionable residential property deals in his native Chicago ( subsidized by a man later convicted of felony public corruption) to a substantial fortune eitht yeas later - his new digs in Washington cost a reported $6,5 million.

Of course we shouldn't forget the ever-frugal and scrupulous Clintons. The intersting land deals and remarkably rewarding plays in commodity markets started in The Whitewater/Arkansas days, but as we all know they emerged "dead broke" after eight years in the White House, but remarkably with the instant ability to almost sumultaneously buy two multi million dolar homes in Chappaqua NY and Washington DC, not to mention free travel worldwide for Bill and a rather lavish penthouse atop the "Clinton Library" in Litle Rock. The graft of course reached a new plane of oportunities with the Cration of the Clinton "Charity" foundation. Tey both reached a bad end recently, but it was well-deserved and long overdue.

Perhaps it's boring up there in BC, and Blatham has to make this **** up just to stay awake.
giujohn
 
  -1  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 11:21 am
A Donald Trump Administration equals Common Sense regulation and the application thereof.

We won the election there are consequences to elections... So suck it up buttercup.

For those suffering from climate change Hysteria, first read the book "Climateism!"... if you'd like to try to discount the science in this book with real scientific fact I'll entertain your discussion otherwise you're nothing but a bunch of hysterical whiners basing your beliefs on wild computer models engineered solely for the purpose of causing your Hysteria and you should shut the hell up.

Our long National nightmare is over the era of political correctness is finished... And so soon will be Isis and illegal immigration and negative economic growth.
0 Replies
 
layman
 
  0  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 11:21 am
@Baldimo,
Trump spent about $100 million on his own campaign, all while the RNC focused on spending money to help the "down-ballot." He carried a lot of them in on his coat-tails.

They owe him, and they know it. Most decent people will return a favor, when possible. I don't know if Trump will make any money on this party. For all I know he'll pick up the check. But if he does, it will be only an insignificant partial recoupment of his capital.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  2  
Thu 8 Dec, 2016 11:22 am
More on EPA pick, Pruitt, from Jane Mayer
Quote:
Garvin Isaacs, the president of the Oklahoma Bar Association, isn’t one for understatement, but he topped himself in his reaction to the news that Donald Trump is expected to nominate Scott Pruitt, the Oklahoma attorney general, to run the Environmental Protection Agency.

“It’s the worst thing in the history of our environment!” Isaacs exclaimed when I spoke to him on Wednesday. “We are in danger. The whole country is in danger. Our kids are in danger. People have got to do something about the Citizens United decision that is turning our country into an oligarchy, run by oil-and-gas interests,” he said.

Isaacs is a colorful and respected local litigator who has long been a thorn in the side of Oklahoma’s powerful. He claims the fossil-fuel industry “owns the whole darn state.” But his worries at the state level are now national. By choosing Pruitt, Isaacs said, Trump has outsourced his environmental policy to the Republican Party’s most powerful private donors—the oil-and-gas magnates who have funded Pruitt’s campaigns in Oklahoma.

Until now, Pruitt’s greatest claim to national fame was his star role in a Pulitzer Prize-winning investigation by the Times, in 2014. The investigation revealed that a letter Pruitt sent to the E.P.A in 2011, complaining about federal regulators’ estimation of the air pollution caused by drilling in Oklahoma, was actually written by lawyers for Devon Energy, one of the state’s biggest oil-and-gas companies. (“Outstanding!” the company’s director of government relations wrote in a note to Pruitt’s office.) The Times found that Pruitt had sent similar letters, drafted by energy-industry lobbyists, to the Department of the Interior, the Office of Management and Budget, and President Obama. Pruitt has also taken a lead role in coördinating a twenty-eight-state legal challenge to the Obama Administration’s regulations on fossil-fuel pollution, which are at the center of its larger effort to stem climate change.

In taking these anti-regulatory positions, Pruitt has clearly aligned himself with his right-wing campaign donors, including Charles and David Koch. Kochpac, the political-action committee of the brothers’ Kansas-based oil-and-chemical conglomerate, Koch Industries, contributed to Pruitt’s campaigns in 2010, 2013, and 2014. Pruitt has also been backed by several other billionaire oil-and-gas executives, who joined political forces with the Kochs during the Obama years, becoming “investors,” as they called themselves, in the Kochs’ anti-regulatory, pro-business political movement. Harold Hamm, the billionaire founder and chief executive of Continental Resources, and Larry Nichols, the chairman emeritus of Devon Energy, have both supported Pruitt. Hamm, in fact, was the co-chairman of Pruitt’s 2013 reëlection campaign.
What Could Possible Go Wrong?
 

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 0.42 seconds on 05/10/2024 at 10:08:08