Jeb Bush on Climate Change. WTF???

[rudeguy]

Just trying to get some rails on that particular troll post.

As for that one US "citizen," he didn't qualify as a citizen IMO. Of course, my opinion is worth just as much as yours. I'm sure you and ICF are losing a LOT of sleep at night knowing that poor guy was whacked.

So you and I get to vote on who is a citizen? I know you hate it but we do have a Constitution to make those calls. That damn piece of paper just gets in the way of every good democratic idea.

And I do worry about the precedent that was set by that. At what point am I eligible for a drone strike? My son? My mom?


You want to sit around and call Bush a war criminal? Fine. Its just more hyperbole desensitizing us about real war criminals. But that will not change the fact that Obama is a murderer.

 

[fskimospy]

So you and I get to vote on who is a citizen? I know you hate it but we do have a Constitution to make those calls. That damn piece of paper just gets in the way of every good democratic idea.

And I do worry about the precedent that was set by that. At what point am I eligible for a drone strike? My son? My mom?

You want to sit around and call Bush a war criminal? Fine. Its just more hyperbole desensitizing us about real war criminals. But that will not change the fact that Obama is a murderer.

See this is part of the problem though because Bush IS a war criminal by any reasonable definition of the word. Your attempts to gloss over or deny Bush's war crimes does make it harder to go after "real" war criminals.

 

[dank69]

So you and I get to vote on who is a citizen? I know you hate it but we do have a Constitution to make those calls. That damn piece of paper just gets in the way of every good democratic idea.

And I do worry about the precedent that was set by that. At what point am I eligible for a drone strike? My son? My mom?


You want to sit around and call Bush a war criminal? Fine. Its just more hyperbole desensitizing us about real war criminals. But that will not change the fact that Obama is a murderer.

Like I said, it's only my opinion and no I don't get to decide, but if it were up to me it would start with meeting the following conditions:
1) The person hasn't lived in the US for numerous years with no intention of ever returning.
2) The person actively plots attacks against the US and US citizens.
3) The person isn't currently on US soil.
4) There isn't a realistic chance of capturing the person alive without risking more loss of life.

So I think you and your family are safe from my drone army, for now anyway.

 

[glenn1]

If we don't start now, there are large trade offs. I know you are a free market guy like me, but, you have to look at the way the market would work here.

We can work on the problem now, or wait until later. If we wait until later, there are likely things that will happen that cannot be undone. Market adjustments could mean huge losses of live, or living standard. When a market is over capitalized, you get resources diverted to it. When the market adjusts, some resources are wasted, and some productivity is lost. In this case, the lost resources would very likely lead to a loss of life or living standard.

There is more research to be done to understand the trade-offs, but there will be trade offs. A small investment now can give much larger compounded benefits over the long run. Inaction will lead to the problem being compounded, and its possible more resources would need to be used to solve this problem.

The problem is, many will not admit there is even a potential even though the market has. The evidence for the market seeing a problem, is companies spending money to see how to deal with the changing climate.

That's called the Godzilla problem where waiting makes things worse, but we don't know if that would be in play here or if the 'small investment' might make the problem harder to solve in the end. Where I would disagree is that we don't know definitively what step(s) will help the problem, which might have zero net impact, and which might actually work against our long-term interests. Some are fairly no-brainers like "plant more trees." Others may solve one problem but create another, as catalytic converters have reduced smog but create more CO2 emissions. Other "solutions" might do more harm than good akin to how adding lead to gasoline created a bigger problem than what it allegedly solved - something like albedo modification might be a candidate for that category.

 

[desy]

I don't have a problem with redundant infrastructure
It may cost more but it makes us more resilient and without electricity and transportation our lifestyle collapses pretty quickly.
There are many proposed storage solutions to pursue however if subsidized fuel is keeping trying things off the market because the FF lobby wants it that way our civilization suffers just not one industry.

 

[Genx87]

I just don't understand the faux outrage about this guy because as I have stated I think calling him a US citizen, even though technically correct, is really stretching the word citizen past its useful definition.

Oh really? Please tell us how you and the President get to decide who and who isnt a citizen and thus arent allowed to have protections of the constitution. It is amazing to me how people will rationalize a horrible policy because it is their guy they is carrying it out. Replace Obama with George Bush and tell us you support this policy.

 

[rudeguy]

Like I said, it's only my opinion and no I don't get to decide, but if it were up to me it would start with meeting the following conditions:
1) The person hasn't lived in the US for numerous years with no intention of ever returning.
2) The person actively plots attacks against the US and US citizens.
3) The person isn't currently on US soil.
4) There isn't a realistic chance of capturing the person alive without risking more loss of life.

So I think you and your family are safe from my drone army, for now anyway.

My drone army is real!

 

[Genx87]

Like I said, it's only my opinion and no I don't get to decide, but if it were up to me it would start with meeting the following conditions:
1) The person hasn't lived in the US for numerous years with no intention of ever returning.
2) The person actively plots attacks against the US and US citizens.
3) The person isn't currently on US soil.
4) There isn't a realistic chance of capturing the person alive without risking more loss of life.

So I think you and your family are safe from my drone army, for now anyway.

I had no idea moving outside the country is grounds for losing constitutional rights. Actively plotting a crime is not grounds for death penalty. And neither is having no realistic avenue for capture. What you outlined is rather scary.

 

[dank69]

I had no idea moving outside the country is grounds for losing constitutional rights. Actively plotting a crime is not grounds for death penalty. And neither is having no realistic avenue for capture. What you outlined is rather scary.

It isn't pick one and you're dead. It is do ALL those things and you are dead to me. Nice try though.

 

[dank69]

Oh really? Please tell us how you and the President get to decide who and who isnt a citizen and thus arent allowed to have protections of the constitution. It is amazing to me how people will rationalize a horrible policy because it is their guy they is carrying it out. Replace Obama with George Bush and tell us you support this policy.

Maybe you missed the last few times I said I don't get to decide? This has nothing to do with sides. If Obama employed torture I would have still been against it. If Bush had done the exact same thing as Obama with respect to al-Awlaki, I wouldn't have really cared.

 

[Genx87]

It isn't pick one and you're dead. It is do ALL those things and you are dead to me. Nice try though.

All of those are inane reasons to deny a citizens right to trial before execution.

 

[Genx87]

Maybe you missed the last few times I said I don't get to decide? This has nothing to do with sides. If Obama employed torture I would have still been against it. If Bush had done the exact same thing as Obama with respect to al-Awlaki, I wouldn't have really cared.

Let me understand your twisted logic

Execution = ok, even under Bush(uh huh)
Torture = bad

 

[rudeguy]

All of those are inane reasons to deny a citizens right to trial before execution.

You mean murder them.

 

[Genx87]

You mean murder them.

I was trying to sugarcoat it. But yes that can also fall under Murder.

 

[dank69]

All of those are inane reasons to deny a citizens right to trial before execution.

I suppose, if you continue to examine each one in a vacuum instead of all together like I stated.

 

[dank69]

Let me understand your twisted logic

Execution = ok, even under Bush(uh huh)
Torture = bad

That's the level of logic I have come to expect from you. Nevertheless, I don't think I've stated that execution is okay, merely that I don't consider him a US citizen.

 

[soundforbjt]

exactly how many US citizens should the president be allowed to murder?

less than the police?

 

[IndyColtsFan]

Just trying to get some rails on that particular troll post.

As for that one US "citizen," he didn't qualify as a citizen IMO. Of course, my opinion is worth just as much as yours. I'm sure you and ICF are losing a LOT of sleep at night knowing that poor guy was whacked.

No, I like pointing out Harvecrite's lack of strong condemnation for very questionable actions by Obama, including the continuation of many of GWB's horrible policies. At best, we get a mild "I'm disappointed." Where are the third-rate songs about Obama and shredding the Constitution? Where are the walls of text filled with bolded lines and emoticons? Oh, that's right, there is a D after Obama's name, so everything is just fine!

 

[realibrad]

That's called the Godzilla problem where waiting makes things worse, but we don't know if that would be in play here or if the 'small investment' might make the problem harder to solve in the end. Where I would disagree is that we don't know definitively what step(s) will help the problem, which might have zero net impact, and which might actually work against our long-term interests. Some are fairly no-brainers like "plant more trees." Others may solve one problem but create another, as catalytic converters have reduced smog but create more CO2 emissions. Other "solutions" might do more harm than good akin to how adding lead to gasoline created a bigger problem than what it allegedly solved - something like albedo modification might be a candidate for that category.

Humanity is all about doing things and sometimes failing. We have gained a lot of knowledge, and the work that has been done so far points in the direction that something should be done, or else bad things will happen. The big reason most of the models have been incorrect thus far, is the fact that the planet has been able to absorb far more CO2 than we originally thought. There will come a time when the earth has absorbed as much as it can, and temps will go up faster.

There are many little things that could be done that are not very expensive. One of the major things is to stop subsidizing things, so people use what they need, and not waste because its free to do so. Much of the waste now comes from market manipulation. CA is a great example, and because I used to live there, I got to see a lot of it first hand.

But, I don't know how small compounded investment could be a long term hard. No matter what is done, its a gamble because we cant know all the factors or what will happen in the future. We have to look at the data and make our best guess. Right now, the data is pretty clear that the risk is likely very high, vs the things we can start doing now to help.

 

[bshole]

Humanity is all about doing things and sometimes failing. We have gained a lot of knowledge, and the work that has been done so far points in the direction that something should be done, or else bad things will happen. The big reason most of the models have been incorrect thus far, is the fact that the planet has been able to absorb far more CO2 than we originally thought. There will come a time when the earth has absorbed as much as it can, and temps will go up faster.

Um are we to take your word for this? Are you God or something? I have heard multiple reasons from multiple warmists about why the models are failing. You believe you know the reason, just realize that your belief is based on faith, not on data. I suspect that global climate is more complex than climate scientists currently believe. I have strong doubts that they will be able to predict climate with any degree of precision/accuracy in my lifetime.

 

[dank69]

No, I like pointing out Harvecrite's lack of strong condemnation for very questionable actions by Obama, including the continuation of many of GWB's horrible policies. At best, we get a mild "I'm disappointed." Where are the third-rate songs about Obama and shredding the Constitution? Where are the walls of text filled with bolded lines and emoticons? Oh, that's right, there is a D after Obama's name, so everything is just fine!

I'm just not feeling it from you, man. Trying to pretend that Obama is as bad as Bush was is a losing proposition.

 

[Genx87]

That's the level of logic I have come to expect from you. Nevertheless, I don't think I've stated that execution is okay, merely that I don't consider him a US citizen.

Yes, you have stated execution is ok. You rationalize it by coming up with a list of inane reasons that turns him or future citizens into not being a citizen. Which then somehow in your warped brain means when a missile from a drone kills them on order from the President, they weren't executed.

 

[IndyColtsFan]

I'm just not feeling it from you, man. Trying to pretend that Obama is as bad as Bush was is a losing proposition.

I would say killing an American citizen without trial is in the realm of "shredding the Constitution," wouldn't you? Harvecrite seemed so concerned with Constitution shredding when a Republican was in office.....

 

[dank69]

I would say killing an American citizen without trial is in the realm of "shredding the Constitution," wouldn't you? Harvecrite seemed so concerned with Constitution shredding when a Republican was in office.....

I would say so too, which is why I'm emphasizing that I don't believe he qualifies as a US citizen.

 

[dank69]

Yes, you have stated execution is ok. You rationalize it by coming up with a list of inane reasons that turns him or future citizens into not being a citizen. Which then somehow in your warped brain means when a missile from a drone kills them on order from the President, they weren't executed.

Inane, lol. The guy did everything except formally renounce his citizenship. You think he thought of himself as a US citizen? You must be joking.