If Donald Trump becomes a believer in Climate Change...

[tytlyf]

You still haven't said what qualifications the Obama had to become the President.
Just what appointees are "questionable".
You know it is getting very very tiresome with all this anit-Fox crap, if you can't stand the heat then stay out of the kitchen.
Just because you liberal/progressive's heads are exploding over some of his appointments I say fine it's about time we have the reins. And I'm enjoying the crap out of it.

What is this Obama qualifications talk? More RW propaganda.
Obama had these qualifications
-Harvard education
-Lawyer
-Constitutional law professor/scholar
-Community organizer
-Senator

But those aren't qualifications in your mind. Bankrupting businesses is credible to you. Trump has no qualifications, he didn't even serve. (dodger)

You will learn one day what Fox and RW media is doing. Until then, you will be disinformed. If it was obvious what RW media does, it wouldn't be effective. There's a reason they target 'heartland conservatives.'

 

[Guy Threepwood]

Only because one has received the investment & subsidies you seem to detest so much.




Fossil fuel industries receive quite generous corporate welfare in countries like the US, the UK etc. And the progress in various areas we've made thanks to fossil fuels is quite remarkable, there's no denying the positive effect its had. The problem is people are all too willing to overlook the negatives:

who ever had to subsidize an oil company?

unless you are calling various business tax write-offs and exemptions 'subsidies'? By which definition- a guy who steals my wallet and throws me back a dollar is 'subsidizing' me!

In reality oil companies heavily subsidize governments.

Or do you think Norway is using it's vast wind farm wealth - to dabble in North Sea oil ?!

• Pollution of countless ecosystems and the reticence of the offending parties to want to clean up the mess they created;
• Exploitation of communities by corporations;
• Resource-based wars in many countries;
• The use of oil profits to prop up tyrannies which violently repress their citizens;
• The fact that when fossil fuel companies go bankrupt its the communities built around the industry who suffer while the business owners & shareholders pocket the profits and walk away

Can't really cover all that in one post- but let;s just say, when people are fighting over the ME for it's abundant sunshine, or Norway for it's howling wind- we'll know 'alternative energy' actually has a value

plus the fact that we'll have to leave a huge amount of the fossil fuels we've discovered in the ground if we're to avoid even further global temperature jumps. Those oil & gas deposits aren't going to be of much use to us now.

Ordovician ice age: >4000 ppm CO2.

You're talking like subsidising as if it's a bad thing. Small businesses (which is what the majority of renewables companies are) haven't a snowball's chance in hell of competing against global mega-corps shifting thousands of barrels of crude a day who can bully them out of the energy market. Same goes for small businesses in any industry when you think about it. Fossil fuel companies have a monopoly on the energy market and it's dangerous. Their influence & money keeps humanity from pursuing other potential energy technologies which could one day clean up our energy usage if improved upon.

Another whole argument- but that's blatantly untrue, there are countless small business, and I own one, which have never take a penny of government money and never would, I consider it stealing from my neighbors.
I do however claim business tax write offs, reclaiming some portion of the money I made because it had to be spent on the business to keep it alive. without which no company could survive.

Electric cars have never been allowed to become economically viable because they represent a threat to Big Oil. Your argument is circular: they're not economically viable so they shouldn't be given a chance; they shouldn't be given a chance because they're not economically viable right now.

You really think Big Oil, in every single country in the world, for > 100 years has kept electric cars down? How come the big horse breeders didn't keep Ford Motor CO down for 100 years?

There is a reason that 'alternative energy' is still 'alternative' after 100 years and God knows how many Billions in subsidy- if it was viable would it STILL be 'alternative' after all this?

I don't remember anyone using gasoline powered defibrillators to jump-start someone's heart. Facetiousness aside, you're forgetting nuclear power which does not use chemical energy so that and electrical energy are not the only choices.

I'd say that was a relatively small and precisely delivered packet of energy- or you'd kill them... But I take your point on nuclear, it's one area with some common ground- we already have a miracle source of vast renewable energy right there, but people just don't like it. I knew a couple of kids who started out in Nuclear Physics at college and switched degrees after Fukushima, the future is uncertain there unfortunately

Thanks for the thoughtful responses..

 

[Guy Threepwood]

They forgot to ask me. I do not recall participating in that poll.

Yes, I'd like to see how those polls were worded... Those sort of polls are not even published if they don't manage to get the results they are looking for

 

[esmith]

I already briefly answered the first question, and if you don't know the answer to the second question, then I let that just speak for itself. And as far as the last item is concerned, it is you who seems to not be able to take the heat in the kitchen with your temper tantrum that more reminiscent of a 74 month old than a 74 year old.

fini

No you have not answered the question "what qualifications did the Obama have" that qualified him to be the President. All you have done is speak in generalities, which is acceptable up to a point. However, you specifically said that President-elect Trump is too ignorant to be President. So I'm going to pin you down and request you give your reason why you think he is too ignorant and why the Obama had better quatlifications. You have said that the Obama surrounded himself with people that gave him good advice, well that is highly debatble seeing the situtation that faces us at this time. It is apparent that President-elect Trump is also building his team from very qualified and smart people that a least knows what they are doing.
Your statement "if you don't know the answer to the second question, then it speaks for itself". I would hazard to guess that the second question is in reference to President-elect Trumps selection of his team. The problem is I do know the answer to the question, the problem is that you and others have a problem with those selections which speaks in favor of those selections. In other words if it bothers those that think as you do then I'm in total agreement with the selection. If you got a problem with President-elect Trumps chocies why not enlignten us with those issues instead of making inanae statments that really doesn't say anything.

As far as a "temper tantrum" you accuse me of having..... No it was not a temper tantrum, I leave that to you children. I was lashing out at the constant attack against a network that consist of news journalism and opinion journalism. The Fox News Channel and Fox Business Channel at least identify those that are opinon journalist and those that are news journalist, unlke the majority of the other networks. Yes I admint to watching a few of the opinion programs on both of the aforementioned channels, at lest I'm smart enough to realize the difference between presenting facts and opinon, unlike many of you.

Only one think left to say and that is I and others have had to suffer through 8 years of failed government and we are looking forward to having the adults back in charge.

 

[esmith]

What is this Obama qualifications talk? More RW propaganda.
Obama had these qualifications
-Harvard education
-Lawyer
-Constitutional law professor/scholar
-Community organizer
-Senator

But those aren't qualifications in your mind. Bankrupting businesses is credible to you. Trump has no qualifications, he didn't even serve. (dodger)

You will learn one day what Fox and RW media is doing. Until then, you will be disinformed. If it was obvious what RW media does, it wouldn't be effective. There's a reason they target 'heartland conservatives.'

Harvard education..... Not necessarily a qualification. What one does with the education is what counts
Lawyer....Not necessarily a qualification. Just because one once held a license to practice law does not qualify one to be President
Constitutional law professor.....Wrong his title at the University of Chicago Law School was a senior lecturer.
Scholar: A specialist in a particular branch of study, especially the humanities. This is a qualification?
Community organizer. You got to be kidding me how does this qualify one to be the President
Senator; He was considered to be among the most liberal U.S. Senator by various analyses. Thanks but no thanks. That disqualifies him in my book to be President.
To be truthful there are no all around discernible qualifications to be the President of the United States. All one needs to do is be able to recognize and select those around him/her to help them make decisions that will be good for the country. And put the Country first.
Maybe one day you will realize that you have been brainwashed by the liberal media and find your way out of the valley of desperation....but I doubt it.
As I said on another post at least Fox News and Fox Business identifies whether a program is opinion journalism or news journalism unlike the majority of the media. Liberal media target the snowflakes and the "takers".

 

[Acim]

Hypothetically, If Donald Trump becomes a believer in Climate Change and champions progressive environmental policies will that spell the end of climate deniers in the U.S.?

No. Why would you even think such a thing?

Or will Republicans in the senate and congress oppose their republican President on this issue?

This. Unless Trump is privy to information that the Left is somehow unable to present (historically or currently), then Trump would be seen as falling into mainstream views of CC and stand opposite of those who oppose changing our policies/economics in favor of this issue.

 

[metis]

What is this Obama qualifications talk? More RW propaganda.
Obama had these qualifications
-Harvard education
-Lawyer
-Constitutional law professor/scholar
-Community organizer
-Senator

But those aren't qualifications in your mind. Bankrupting businesses is credible to you. Trump has no qualifications, he didn't even serve. (dodger)

You will learn one day what Fox and RW media is doing. Until then, you will be disinformed. If it was obvious what RW media does, it wouldn't be effective. There's a reason they target 'heartland conservatives.'

I missed seeing your post until just now, and let me say you are definitely spot-on.

Some don't seem to understand that who could be better at learning from and applying the Constitution of the U.S. than a Harvard educated scholar who was at the top of his class in the area of Constitutional law? When I see some saying he was "unqualified", as I've seen from several on the right, I just have to wonder what their own educational level is at?

BTW, I was looking at the results of the new PPP poll on one of the news channels last night, and the poll of Trump voters is very telling. Almost 70% of them believe that unemployment has gone up since Obama took office, and 40% of them believe the stock market has gone down since he took office. And these were not the only areas of misinformation, btw. Clinton, Stein, and Johnson supporters had much more accurate numbers in these areas. Now, put these numbers with those who don't believe in climate change or evolution, as well as the their majority belief that Obama wasn't born in the U.S. and that he's a Muslim, where could they possibly get that "information" from?

I tried to access that PPP poll earlier today on-line but couldn't find it, so maybe someone reading this here can have better luck than I did. I'll be off shortly and I'm not sure if I'll be able to get on-line much tomorrow.

 

[tytlyf]

Harvard education..... Not necessarily a qualification. What one does with the education is what counts
Lawyer....Not necessarily a qualification. Just because one once held a license to practice law does not qualify one to be President
Constitutional law professor.....Wrong his title at the University of Chicago Law School was a senior lecturer.
Scholar: A specialist in a particular branch of study, especially the humanities. This is a qualification?
Community organizer. You got to be kidding me how does this qualify one to be the President
Senator; He was considered to be among the most liberal U.S. Senator by various analyses. Thanks but no thanks. That disqualifies him in my book to be President.
To be truthful there are no all around discernible qualifications to be the President of the United States. All one needs to do is be able to recognize and select those around him/her to help them make decisions that will be good for the country. And put the Country first.
Maybe one day you will realize that you have been brainwashed by the liberal media and find your way out of the valley of desperation....but I doubt it.
As I said on another post at least Fox News and Fox Business identifies whether a program is opinion journalism or news journalism unlike the majority of the media. Liberal media target the snowflakes and the "takers".

You didn't list Trump qualifications. And 'creating jobs' doesn't count. The presidency isn't supposed to be run like a business, it's a leadership position. Which is what a community organizer is. Working with people, you know.....

Fox is on cable for a reason, they can't get on broadcast. That would hurt their ratings. No one is more biased on TV than Fox. It's a huge difference. You don't notice what Fox does because you don't watch anything else to compare it to.

 

[esmith]

You didn't list Trump qualifications. And 'creating jobs' doesn't count. The presidency isn't supposed to be run like a business, it's a leadership position. Which is what a community organizer is. Working with people, you know.....

If you don't think a business professional isn't a leader then I think you have a very poor misunderstanding of how a business is ran.

Fox is on cable for a reason, they can't get on broadcast. That would hurt their ratings. No one is more biased on TV than Fox. It's a huge difference. You don't notice what Fox does because you don't watch anything else to compare it to.

blah, blah, blah, blah

Get over it...we have a source of information that isn't so liberally biased. Yes, FNC caters to a conservative audience, where else would we get the truth.

 

[esmith]

What is this Obama qualifications talk? More RW propaganda.
Obama had these qualifications
-Harvard education
-Lawyer
-Constitutional law professor/scholar
-Community organizer
-Senator

But those aren't qualifications in your mind. Bankrupting businesses is credible to you. Trump has no qualifications, he didn't even serve. (dodger)

You will learn one day what Fox and RW media is doing. Until then, you will be disinformed. If it was obvious what RW media does, it wouldn't be effective. There's a reason they target 'heartland conservatives.'

I missed seeing your post until just now, and let me say you are definitely spot-on.

Some don't seem to understand that who could be better at learning from and applying the Constitution of the U.S. than a Harvard educated scholar who was at the top of his class in the area of Constitutional law? When I see some saying he was "unqualified", as I've seen from several on the right, I just have to wonder what their own educational level is at?

BTW, I was looking at the results of the new PPP poll on one of the news channels last night, and the poll of Trump voters is very telling. Almost 70% of them believe that unemployment has gone up since Obama took office, and 40% of them believe the stock market has gone down since he took office. And these were not the only areas of misinformation, btw. Clinton, Stein, and Johnson supporters had much more accurate numbers in these areas. Now, put these numbers with those who don't believe in climate change or evolution, as well as the their majority belief that Obama wasn't born in the U.S. and that he's a Muslim, where could they possibly get that "information" from?

I tried to access that PPP poll earlier today on-line but couldn't find it, so maybe someone reading this here can have better luck than I did. I'll be off shortly and I'm not sure if I'll be able to get on-line much tomorrow.

Just one question to both of you. If the Obama and what he believes in is so great, why is the overall numbers of Democrats in State and Federal government at the lowest it has ever been in modern( maybe ever)history.

 

[Guy Threepwood]

No you have not answered the question "what qualifications did the Obama have" that qualified him to be the President. All you have done is speak in generalities, which is acceptable up to a point. However, you specifically said that President-elect Trump is too ignorant to be President. So I'm going to pin you down and request you give your reason why you think he is too ignorant and why the Obama had better quatlifications. You have said that the Obama surrounded himself with people that gave him good advice, well that is highly debatble seeing the situtation that faces us at this time. It is apparent that President-elect Trump is also building his team from very qualified and smart people that a least knows what they are doing.
Your statement "if you don't know the answer to the second question, then it speaks for itself". I would hazard to guess that the second question is in reference to President-elect Trumps selection of his team. The problem is I do know the answer to the question, the problem is that you and others have a problem with those selections which speaks in favor of those selections. In other words if it bothers those that think as you do then I'm in total agreement with the selection. If you got a problem with President-elect Trumps chocies why not enlignten us with those issues instead of making inanae statments that really doesn't say anything.

As far as a "temper tantrum" you accuse me of having..... No it was not a temper tantrum, I leave that to you children. I was lashing out at the constant attack against a network that consist of news journalism and opinion journalism. The Fox News Channel and Fox Business Channel at least identify those that are opinon journalist and those that are news journalist, unlke the majority of the other networks. Yes I admint to watching a few of the opinion programs on both of the aforementioned channels, at lest I'm smart enough to realize the difference between presenting facts and opinon, unlike many of you.

Only one think left to say and that is I and others have had to suffer through 8 years of failed government and we are looking forward to having the adults back in charge.

Yes, the economy is always #1 in peoples concerns, and Donald Trump is probably the first president in living memory who could run a lemonade stand profitably, not to mention a multinational organization. That makes him infinitely more qualified than a 'community organizer' and 'head of debating class' at school.

 

[metis]

Just one question to both of you. If the Obama and what he believes in is so great, why is the overall numbers of Democrats in State and Federal government at the lowest it has ever been in modern( maybe ever)history.

First of all, Obama's approval rate upon leaving office is now higher than any president over the last three decades, and Trump's approval/disapproval rate is still well "under water".

Secondly, polls I've seen show that Obama would easily win an election against Trump.

Thirdly, Trump ran against Hillary, not Obama.

And finally, now we will have Comrad Trump as president, who dismisses our own intelligence network and defends Putin and Russia. Ya, he's quite a "patriot".

Matter of fact, just how truly patriotic are those who are still defending him while dissing our own intelligence network, and that includes McConnell. What intelligence could Comrad Trump possibly have that could go against what the CIA and 16 other intelligence agencies have concluded? Matter of fact, even without the CIA coming forth, it's just plain old common sense about Russia's involvement in supporting Comrad Trump because the only leaks released were against Hillary and her staff.

As it turns out, they also hacked into the RNC computers, as we heard this morning, and yet we didn't see anything negative coming from Wikileaks about him. But maybe after he becomes premier on January 20th, ...

Hey, don't forget to polish off your hammer & sickle, you'll also get a cabinet position in Comrad Trump's KGB.

 

[esmith]

First of all, Obama's approval rate upon leaving office is now higher than any president over the last three decades, and Trump's approval/disapproval rate is still well "under water".
Secondly, polls I've seen show that Obama would easily win an election against Trump.
Thirdly, Trump ran against Hillary, not Obama.
And finally, now we will have Comrad Trump as president, who dismisses our own intelligence network and defends Putin and Russia. Ya, he's quite a "patriot".
Matter of fact, just how truly patriotic are those who are still defending him while dissing our own intelligence network, and that includes McConnell. What intelligence could Comrad Trump possibly have that could go against what the CIA and 16 other intelligence agencies have concluded? Matter of fact, even without the CIA coming forth, it's just plain old common sense about Russia's involvement in supporting Comrad Trump because the only leaks released were against Hillary and her staff.
As it turns out, they also hacked into the RNC computers, as we heard this morning, and yet we didn't see anything negative coming from Wikileaks about him. But maybe after he becomes premier on January 20th, ...
Hey, don't forget to polish off your hammer & sickle, you'll also get a cabinet position in Comrad Trump's KGB.

(Note quoted post edited)
I think the approval ratings for the Obama is of a personal nature not of a policy nature.
Do you agree that the Obama reflects the political direction and policies of the Democrats?
Do you agree that the Democrats have lost more seats in government since Obama took office and are at the lowest since he Civil War? (see Republican's Dominate Government and The Facts Or do you disagree with those facts?
You make the comment that Trump is dismissing our own intelligence networks and defends Putin and Russia. However is he not correct that Putin is rebuilding Russia's image and influence. Now this does not indicate one way or another that he supports what Putin is doing, he is just stating a fact. To me this was a direct barb aimed at the feckless leadership job of the Obama. Of course this is only my opinion. You also forget that the Obama disregarded the intelligence on the ISIS evolution. He, the Obama, even admitted that ISIS was not on his "radar" and thought they were just a "jayvee team" disregarding intelligence sources and the previous administration warnings.

Now you are saying we have Comrad(? your misspelling by accident or on purpose) Trump. Well yes we do have comrade Trump as a comrade being a person who shares in one's activities, occupation, etc.; companion, associate, or friend. (the definition of comrade)
However I do believe you are using the word as a person of member of the Communist Party or someone with strongly leftist views (same source) (hmmm leftest views....isn't that you liberals/progressives)
As far as the leaks go is it possible if the Russian government, read Putin, was behind all of the DNC and anti-Hillary material could it be for payback for Hillary spouting off about the Russian elections. We know Putin has disdain for the Obama and as mentioned no liking for the Hillary.

No, I don't need a position in FSB (be nice if you would be current in your understanding), but we will have to see what my superiors in the Tal Shiar think.
.

 

[metis]

(Note quoted post edited)
I think the approval ratings for the Obama is of a personal nature not of a policy nature.
Do you agree that the Obama reflects the political direction and policies of the Democrats?
Do you agree that the Democrats have lost more seats in government since Obama took office and are at the lowest since he Civil War? (see Republican's Dominate Government and The Facts Or do you disagree with those facts?
You make the comment that Trump is dismissing our own intelligence networks and defends Putin and Russia. However is he not correct that Putin is rebuilding Russia's image and influence. Now this does not indicate one way or another that he supports what Putin is doing, he is just stating a fact. To me this was a direct barb aimed at the feckless leadership job of the Obama. Of course this is only my opinion. You also forget that the Obama disregarded the intelligence on the ISIS evolution. He, the Obama, even admitted that ISIS was not on his "radar" and thought they were just a "jayvee team" disregarding intelligence sources and the previous administration warnings.

Now you are saying we have Comrad(? your misspelling by accident or on purpose) Trump. Well yes we do have comrade Trump as a comrade being a person who shares in one's activities, occupation, etc.; companion, associate, or friend. (the definition of comrade)
However I do believe you are using the word as a person of member of the Communist Party or someone with strongly leftist views (same source) (hmmm leftest views....isn't that you liberals/progressives)
As far as the leaks go is it possible if the Russian government, read Putin, was behind all of the DNC and anti-Hillary material could it be for payback for Hillary spouting off about the Russian elections. We know Putin has disdain for the Obama and as mentioned no liking for the Hillary.

No, I don't need a position in FSB (be nice if you would be current in your understanding), but we will have to see what my superiors in the Tal Shiar think.
.

There was a day when any thought of Russian intervention in our domestic affairs would be met with outrage, but you turn this all around and defend Putin and what the Russians did.

BTW, oligarchies and dictatorships go in the polar opposite direction of what liberals believe in. The basic economic plan of Marx was liberal, but what Lenin, Stalin, and the other Soviet leaders did was certainly not liberal, as totalitarianism and the oppression and persecution of innocents are antithesis to the liberal mind. But they ain't intrinsically antithesis to the conservative mind as we've seen throughout history.

Oh, I used "KGB" for a reason, but that obviously went over your head. However, I will give you credit for noticing my accidental misspelling of "comrade".

 

[esmith]

Little bit of misdirection here I do believe.
1. No, I was not defending Russia or Putin. I was putting forth one idea why Putin went after the Democrats. Obviously you have an opinion why they did so, care to share it?

2. As far as my calling you out on the noun comrade. All I was doing was pointing out the definition of the word comrade and if you would care to look it up in your Funk & Waggles you will see that it it is also a word to denote a leftist. From : the definition of comrade

noun
1. a person who shares in one's activities, occupation, etc.; companion, associate, or friend.
2. a fellow member of a fraternal group, political party, etc.
3. a member of the Communist Party or someone with strongly leftist views.

I can't help it if you don't know the meaning of words You were probably educated in one of those leftist institutions of higher learning where the professors should be call Comrade Professor(see def 3 above)

Well as far as the acronym KGB. Yeah I know what you were attempting to do by using it, but I just love pulling your chain.
We must also educate the uneducated on this forum who have no idea about history.
Or for a matter of fact what is going on outside of their leftest news sources.