Just how much garbage was this plant spouting into the air that it would cost 100 mil to update their equipment?
Gas Bandit's Political Thread V: The Vampire Likes Bats
- Thread starter GasBandit
- Start date
GasBandit
Staff member
The EPA raised their Ambient Air Quality standards by a factor of 10 in 2008. I'm pretty sure this outcome was a goal, not an unintended side effect.
Because it wasn't even the least the conversation I was having. I never said there was anything he could or couldn't do. The GoP talking heads were claiming Obama started AFTER they themselves stated it began 10yrs ago. That's it, the end. You added more to try and make a point I could care less about and I found it funny.
It's called plausible deniability, or he's severely incompetent. You could probably say he's making himself severely incompetent with a dangerous amount of plausible deniability.
GasBandit
Staff member
It's been his Go-To defense on just about every failure of his administration though. "Bush did it first and/or I had no idea this was going on."
My favorite part is how the GOP talking heads this morning opened with:
-The NSA says the spying has been going on for 10yrs.-
then followed with
-Obama is a double talker, on one face he says he wants to bring the Nation into a better light with foreign policy, then he starts spying on our allies-
That's impressive, I didn't realize Obama was in his third term
In that case, I'll address the post more directly.
The first statement does not mention Obama at all. It does not state the NSA was created by Obama nor that Obama was the first president to sanction its use--this is why I find your closing statement to make little sense. You're mocking something no one ever claimed (at least in what you've quoted).
The second statement in no way conflicts with the first. Obama made it very clear from his first term through his second--he wants to improve the US image abroad. The NSA hurts that image. Spying on allies further damages that image. As President he has the power to stop, curb, or change the behavior of the NSA with a variety of powers that he's been given as President. If his goal was indeed to improve the US image--perhaps he shouldn't have approved spying on our allies. Even if we pretend Bush did it first, Obama is fully capable of putting a stop to it--but he chose not to.
All branches of the military are transitioning to green bullets and already have a massive stockpile to burn through. There is no reason for the government to keep such an environmental nightmare around anymore I guess. It's good in the long run at any rate because it'll force bullet producers to go green or go out of business.
This is really only going to effect normal citizens until green bullet production finally catches up to lead bullet. Expect muzzle loaders and all steel shot to become more popular in the short term.
More nanny state nonsense.
http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/feds-order-school-to-ban-packed-lunches-without-doctors-note
http://www.redflagnews.com/headlines/feds-order-school-to-ban-packed-lunches-without-doctors-note
GasBandit
Staff member
The video in question is that one I posted some time ago with the MSNBC talking head lady talking about how we have to "get over" the idea that kids belong to their parents alone, and how only once we accept the idea that a child is everyone's responsibility can we "move forward" into the brave future she envisions for us all.
Edit: Ninja'd by Dei.
Edit: Ninja'd by Dei.
Hey, I didn't know you had those idiots around too!
The funny thing is, over here we hear those reasonings used to promote state schools in contrast to the catholic school net, by the same people who favor setting up a wide network of Islamic school as well (there are quite a few already, but they fall under the "free" school network around here). It takes a lot of self-contradictory crap to make those two work in one mind, but the left can.
The funny thing is, over here we hear those reasonings used to promote state schools in contrast to the catholic school net, by the same people who favor setting up a wide network of Islamic school as well (there are quite a few already, but they fall under the "free" school network around here). It takes a lot of self-contradictory crap to make those two work in one mind, but the left can.
These people are basically the left wing version of "Won't you think of the children?" social conservatives. We don't exactly regard them very well ether. That said, we basically got rid of the notion that children belong to their parents the moment the government was able to take them from you for mistreating them/being unable to provide for them. Adding "does not take their nutritional needs into account" does not seem like such a far fetched extension when childhood obesity is as rampant as it is...
... as long as you are willing to ignore the fact that citizens don't have complete control over their socioeconomic situation, the price and accessibility of healthy foods, and the simple fact that most school menus are just as poorly nutritional as the food kids get at home because it's the only way they can GET the kids to eat the food.
... as long as you are willing to ignore the fact that citizens don't have complete control over their socioeconomic situation, the price and accessibility of healthy foods, and the simple fact that most school menus are just as poorly nutritional as the food kids get at home because it's the only way they can GET the kids to eat the food.
GasBandit
Staff member
Man, two Obama-critical pieces on MSNBC in one day? Somebody in the newsroom must have gotten seriously snubbed by the white house to fall out of love this hard.
So what exactly does the bystander-in-chief DO know about that happens under his watch?
In any sane society, this sort of stuff would be presidency-ending.
So what exactly does the bystander-in-chief DO know about that happens under his watch?
In any sane society, this sort of stuff would be presidency-ending.
GasBandit
Staff member
Yyyyeah about that whole "Obama didn't know" thing vis a vis the NSA spying on foreign leaders - NSA says he OK'd it, and they're kinda ticked at him for trying to throw them under the bus.
Here's someone who apparently applies to the MSNBC theory of child rearing.
http://www.1075theriver.com/pages/p...781995&desktop=true&desktopviewduration=72000
http://www.1075theriver.com/pages/p...781995&desktop=true&desktopviewduration=72000
Would be more convincing if the NSA hadn't gone on the record as saying they don't collect information on American citizens under oath.
The NSA lied directly to congress and to the American people over literally everything else why should we believe them on this?
GasBandit
Staff member
Because the other party in the story also lies routinely to congress and the American people over everything else.
To be fair "Fast and Furious" and the IRS scandal were and are purely trumped up. If he had "known" about them before they became big news stories then he really does have a magical time machine.
Solyndra I don't quite understand why he would need to be specifically briefed on it. A company that got loans from the federal government went out of business it's unfortunate but it happens.
Really the only legitimate complaint in there is the spying on the associated press. For that he needed to fire Eric Holder if I am to believe that he didn't know anything about that before hand.[DOUBLEPOST=1383153214,1383153110][/DOUBLEPOST]
So you're just believing the liar you want to believe? With no additional proof necessary.
Okay then.
Non sequitur to what I was saying or were you responding to somebody else?
Where is there blind belief? I honestly don't know what to believe about Obama knowing or not knowing about the extent of the NSA's actions.
All I know is that the NSA lies as a matter of course directly to every group who tries to exert influence over them so what they say can't be trusted.
I'm not actually saying that. I'm saying that the NSA will need to provide actual proof before I believe them.
GasBandit
Staff member
No, I'm believing the liar whose lie passes the smell test.
Fast and Furious was not "trumped up," it was restarted and run by one of his top cronies. The IRS may have been mostly the work of underlings, but their actions were definitely guided by the tone set at the top. Solyndra was more than just "some company," it was the poster child/talking point for his showing the Way to the Future (tm) vis a vis alternative energy investment. According to WaPo, the Obama administration (or at least his chief handler, Rahm Emanuel) knew about Solyndra's problems 2 years before they declared bankruptcy.[DOUBLEPOST=1383157322][/DOUBLEPOST]
If only Obama was held to that standard.
Fast and Furious was trumped up.
IRS scandal was trumped up
Still not seeing the huge deal with Solyndra. Is it a bigger concern or a smaller concern than Haliburton charging the US government to move "sailboat fuel" in Iraq?
And how exactly does the NSA's claim pass the smell test?
GasBandit
Staff member
No, it wasn't. The Fortune article you link was. For example, Becca Watkins, House Committee on Oversight and Government Reform spokeswoman had this to say about it:
If it was trumped up why did they admit to it?
Because Obama was intimately connected to the people involved, his administration was glove-in-hand with them from start to finish, and it reveals one of his ideological/policy sacred cows for the cynical cash cow it really is... and despite the evidence to the contrary, he told the American people he learned about it on the news, same as they did.
Occam's Razor - Is it more likely that the NSA's vast espionage efforts went on unbeknownst to the commander in chief or with the approval of the President and his lieutenants? Is it more likely that Obama didn't know and wasn't involved, when that's been the excuse he's trotted out for almost every single other scandal during his terms, no matter how ridiculous a defense it was?
Odd how she can make a claim about Issa demanding Holder's resignation when Issa isn't mentioned once in the article.
And I have a tendancy not to take AT seriously at all. You have an actual news source debating the Fortune article? Or even one that contends with the main claim of the Fortune article? Namely that the ATF was stymied by local gun laws from arresting any of the people involved in the gun running?
Probably the same reason they fired Shirly Sharod. Hoping to get it off their plates quickly and then not wanting to revisit the situation when the truth came to light.
Would you believe that I think both are equally likely? The NSA does have a nasty tendency to lie to those who try to curtail it's efforts and the Obama whitehouse seems pretty good at ignoring things they don't want to see.