It might not be the most absolutely economically cheapest route, but continuing to rely on oil and coal is just going to get our world's ecosystem destroyed, and eventually us along with it. As long as it's available society is going to take the quickest and cheapest route and to hell with any future consequences. It's better to wean ourselves of the cheap dope now, even if it stings a little and gain from it in the future with not only having alternatives available but with the advantage of maybe salvaging our environment along with it. People can’t always wait unit past the 11th hour to try and fix things that are screwed up because of selfish reasons.
Obama Admin ELECT already talking EO
- Thread starter Facetious
- Start date
Will E Worm
Conspiracy...
Why laugh when you don't know what you're talking about? :dunno: :tongue:
Snopes is only good for some things.
I don't care so much what snopes' opinion is on the subject, but they thoroughly presented the interview IN CONTEXT and I think we can make our own decisions from that. To me, it was clear Obama was NOT saying he is a Muslim.
thanksimout
Loves the double vag
That was my point precisely, almost anything taken out of context can be used against the speaker, twisted and made to sound opposite of the speaker's intentions.
Thank you for a polite and civil dialogue on the subject, I appreciate being able to share ideas and opinions with others on differing viewpoints.
I am open minded and I am looking for facts that support claims.
doublevaglvr
Rattrap
Doesn't feed trolls and would appreciate it if you
And it should be there anyway. D-rock put it pretty succinctly:
Emphasis added.
I absolutely support gas prices rising. They need to, as people won't make any necessary changes otherwise. True, this means not only does it cost more to drive a car (which, in my mind, is a good thing, as people shouldn't be driving nearly as much as they do anyway), but the price of goods will rise, too - but is that such a bad thing? We as Americans consume epic levels of crap every day. We may get our cake and eat it too now, but our **** and grandkids will be left only with our garbage.
Facetious
Moderated
Stem cell research aside, Obama and his "environmentalist" allies, have nothing to back up their claim that this proposed drilling in Utah would cause any harm to the environment whatsoever. "Harmful to the environment" is a shabby excuse, particularly when they intend to burn all the more, filthy dirty coal, in place of the cleaner burning natural gas. What happened to the "seriousness of the charge" that we need to cut back on greenhouse gas emissions ?
Premium Link
Upgrade
is the filthiest most harmful thing that you could possibly use for energy ! Don’t talk to me about “clean coal” until you understand that it isn’t really clean at all ! “cleaner”, maybe, but at what additional cost ?
It’s pure politics - this side believes this so it’s obligatory that the other side must believe that. It doesn’t matter if millions of Americans suffer, there must be a divide between the two political parties, it is imperative that the two conflict no matter what the cost !
Does there always have to be dissension between the parties ? It is my opinion that both the Democrat and Republican parties, when working together, have the capacity to employ a sensible form of govt., a form of government that works best for the greatest amount of people, i.e. - "democracy".
Weed out the ideologues !
The future is emission free, clean nuclear energy. Fossil Fuels will not last forever and alternative sources will never amount to more than 10% of our needs.
It’s pure politics - this side believes this so it’s obligatory that the other side must believe that. It doesn’t matter if millions of Americans suffer, there must be a divide between the two political parties, it is imperative that the two conflict no matter what the cost !
Does there always have to be dissension between the parties ? It is my opinion that both the Democrat and Republican parties, when working together, have the capacity to employ a sensible form of govt., a form of government that works best for the greatest amount of people, i.e. - "democracy".
Weed out the ideologues !
The future is emission free, clean nuclear energy. Fossil Fuels will not last forever and alternative sources will never amount to more than 10% of our needs.
I don't think it's how european socio-liberal countries (EU) have slowly build up an economy that rivalises with the USA's nowadays...
1. Do you own a car?
2. If yes on answer 1 do you use to drive to work?
3. Do you have ****?
4. If yes do you have to drive them to school? would you have them walk or bicycle to school during the cold winter at temperatures 10 degrees, snow, three mile walk?
5. If you do have **** and assuming that you have a ****** to take care of, then medical plans, proper health shots for ****, physical exams, school items, clothing, food,utilities, house/apartment rent, car maintenance, gasoline price, after school activities,cable,phone,internet,emergencies anything else not cover...so is still ok if prices on everything goes up?
6. Wait will all those possibilities and responsibilities your job closes and you lose your job...what then? how good will saving the enviroment will do to you then and your ******? Are the polar bears or birds save you?
:thumbsup::thumbsup:
I had a hell of a lot fun when I was in my 20's did not cared much about anything, but I still was considerate and knew that there are people out there hurting on bad economies and that the far left ideas of going green now at any cost is going to hurt this country more than it will help. Sure let's tie our hands and let other countries continue to grow without no enviromental concerns while we just give them the other cheek and bend over and get fuck by them.
Don_equis:
Do you even know what far left means? Im sure you are!
You have solid points that i enjoy reading (agreeing or not regardless) but i jump on my chair each time you are using such kind of adjectives. I mean, hearing you, everything that is leftish is always far left. So if those things are far left, which word do you use for the real far left ideologies?
Like many, i consider the Green as an ideology by itself nowadays. It's no longer belong to left ideologies. There is way too many rightwingers who also embrassed the Green to label it left or far left.
Don I could care less about saving polar bears or birds for the sake of saving them.The point about their survival is if they don't have an enviorment in which they can survive,can humans be far behind?
Last time this started with the gas and everything else going through the roof, the people at the lower end of the economy chain suffered terribly.
These are people who have a very hard time making the basic mortgage/rent/keeping the lights on and having food on the table. Some people literally had to decide IF they could go to work because the price of gas made it too difficult.
Supporting this is not only selfish because of your own views, it is a lack of understanding for the people who are the worst affected.
Again there are people having very hard time making it week to week without some power hungry wannabe dictator with a chip on his shoulder doing something stupid because he is on a power trip.
Common sense needs to make an appearance here.
AS for the opinions about getting off oil, that will come as soon as it CAN be developed, there is just no READILY AVAILABLE solution. There is no need for making such radical moves, because the technology IS moving along, but there are many people who HAVE TO keep going as they are because they can not afford to see large chunks of their income disappear because of a few people who only see that we need to throw the baby out with the bathwater.
COMMON SENSE is your friend, learn to use it.
Far left, well it lacks common sense, for example people who like to push their agenda in an extreme way no matter if it gonna hurt a lot of people, if you tell them that in the end result people won't be able to afford things because of the extreme measures taken, even after it went against the general consensus...things need to be done slowly and gradually not rush into these radical energy policies so quickly.
The same thing can happen in the far right, look at how soon we got involved in Iraq.
I don't like either extreme or to take sides, just plain common sense I **** keep hearing "why did we not see this comming?" when we do see it and we ignore it and then bamm! "how did that happened"?
Nothing to argue with that. Actually, excellent post there don_equis! :thumbsup:
Jagger69
Three lullabies in an ancient tongue
Ahhhh....a racist tone perhaps??? "lazy ghetto people".....who are you referring to, Georges? Poor white trash perhaps? You don't have a fucking clue about American society.
Instead let's go ahead and favor greedy wall street thieves who hold us hostage with the prospect of a collapsed economy if we don't give them $700 billion of our hard-earned money to keep their sorry fucking asses afloat. If it's waste and welfare on one end, it has to be the same on the other.
It isn't your money Georges. The fact that you see "no good" from an Obama presidency after your dogmatic and unwavering support for a failed administration simply because it shares your political philosophy makes me feel all the better about the chances for things improving for the United States of America under President Obama. Thanks for the dose of confidence.
Obama may reverse Bush policies on stem cells, drilling, abortion
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President-elect Barack Obama could reverse some of President Bush's most controversial executive orders, including restrictions on embryonic stem cell research, shortly after taking office in January.
President-elect Barack Obama may overturn many of the executive orders that President Bush implemented.
1 of 2 Two other executive orders from Bush -- one dealing with a so-called "gag" order on international aid organizations regarding abortion, the other with oil and gas drilling on federal lands -- also are receiving increased scrutiny.
Obama's transition team is reviewing hundreds of Bush's executive orders, according to John Podesta, Obama's transition co-chair.
New presidents often use executive orders to put their stamp on Washington quickly. Unlike laws, which require months to complete and the consent of Congress, presidents can use their executive authority to order federal agencies to implement current policies.
"Much of what a president does, he really has to do with the Congress -- for example, budgeting, legislation on policy -- but executive actions are ones where the president can act alone," said Martha Kumar of the White House Transition Project, a nonpartisan group established to help new presidential administrations. See what orders Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, other presidents issued »
Obama is expected to use his executive authority to reverse Bush's order limiting the types of embryonic stem cell research that can receive federal tax dollars.
Don't Miss
Obama teams works to flesh out staff
Bush calls meeting with Obama 'friendly'
Names emerge for possible Obama Cabinet
Advocates for those suffering from a host of diseases -- including diabetes, Parkinson's disease and spinal cord injuries -- are eagerly awaiting the Bush-era restrictions to be lifted.
"We have every reason to believe -- if not on Day One, then in the very near future -- they will be issuing an order rescinding this policy," said Amy Comstock Rick, president of the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research. Watch how Obama could reverse Bush »
In August 2001, Bush barred the National Institutes of Health from funding research on embryonic stem cells other than that using 60 cell lines existing when he signed the executive order.
Researchers say the ban has limited their progress and want the opportunity to create new stem cells from human embryos. Many conservatives, however, object to the destruction of human embryos because they believe it ends a human life.
On his campaign Web site, Obama said he supports the creation of new stem cells from embryos created for in vitro fertilization treatments that would otherwise be discarded.
But White House spokeswoman Dana Perino on Monday suggested that the incoming Obama administration should consider keeping Bush's policy in place.
"Unfortunately, the president's position on stem cells has been misconstrued over the years, with the suggestion that President Bush put a ban on research for embryonic stem cell research. That is not true," Perino said. "The president made a very important choice after a lot of careful deliberation." Watch Obama's ambitious agenda »
Other controversial Bush measures Obama is expected to overturn are related to abortion and ****** planning.
U.S. State Department officials and ****** planning groups such as Planned Parenthood said they expect Obama to overturn the "Mexico City" policy, first instituted by the Reagan administration. The policy prevents taxpayer dollars from funding groups that perform or promote abortions overseas.
President Clinton dropped the order, but Bush re-implemented it and expanded the policy to ensure State Department funding does not go to ****** planning organizations that even counsel about abortion.
An Obama administration also could overturn the Bush administration policy of banning funding to organizations such as the U.N. Population Fund that operate in countries that practice ****** sterilization, including China, which adheres to the "one *****" policy.
Podesta said his team also is reviewing Bush's order that lifted restrictions on oil drilling on fragile federal lands in Utah. Environmental groups decried Bush's decision when he opened the lands to exploration this month, and Podesta called the decision a "mistake."
One set of executive orders that may take longer to overturn pertains to detainees at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, military prison.
Obama has said he wants to close the prison, but Denis McDonough, a senior adviser to the incoming Democrat, said Monday that no decisions have been made about what to do with the prison's 255 inmates.
"There is no process in place to make that decision until his national security and legal teams are assembled," McDonough said.
Reversing Bush's executive orders would be an immediate way for Obama to show that a new era has begun in Washington, said Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor.
Premium Link Upgrade
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- President-elect Barack Obama could reverse some of President Bush's most controversial executive orders, including restrictions on embryonic stem cell research, shortly after taking office in January.
President-elect Barack Obama may overturn many of the executive orders that President Bush implemented.
1 of 2 Two other executive orders from Bush -- one dealing with a so-called "gag" order on international aid organizations regarding abortion, the other with oil and gas drilling on federal lands -- also are receiving increased scrutiny.
Obama's transition team is reviewing hundreds of Bush's executive orders, according to John Podesta, Obama's transition co-chair.
New presidents often use executive orders to put their stamp on Washington quickly. Unlike laws, which require months to complete and the consent of Congress, presidents can use their executive authority to order federal agencies to implement current policies.
"Much of what a president does, he really has to do with the Congress -- for example, budgeting, legislation on policy -- but executive actions are ones where the president can act alone," said Martha Kumar of the White House Transition Project, a nonpartisan group established to help new presidential administrations. See what orders Lincoln, Franklin D. Roosevelt, other presidents issued »
Obama is expected to use his executive authority to reverse Bush's order limiting the types of embryonic stem cell research that can receive federal tax dollars.
Don't Miss
Obama teams works to flesh out staff
Bush calls meeting with Obama 'friendly'
Names emerge for possible Obama Cabinet
Advocates for those suffering from a host of diseases -- including diabetes, Parkinson's disease and spinal cord injuries -- are eagerly awaiting the Bush-era restrictions to be lifted.
"We have every reason to believe -- if not on Day One, then in the very near future -- they will be issuing an order rescinding this policy," said Amy Comstock Rick, president of the Coalition for the Advancement of Medical Research. Watch how Obama could reverse Bush »
In August 2001, Bush barred the National Institutes of Health from funding research on embryonic stem cells other than that using 60 cell lines existing when he signed the executive order.
Researchers say the ban has limited their progress and want the opportunity to create new stem cells from human embryos. Many conservatives, however, object to the destruction of human embryos because they believe it ends a human life.
On his campaign Web site, Obama said he supports the creation of new stem cells from embryos created for in vitro fertilization treatments that would otherwise be discarded.
But White House spokeswoman Dana Perino on Monday suggested that the incoming Obama administration should consider keeping Bush's policy in place.
"Unfortunately, the president's position on stem cells has been misconstrued over the years, with the suggestion that President Bush put a ban on research for embryonic stem cell research. That is not true," Perino said. "The president made a very important choice after a lot of careful deliberation." Watch Obama's ambitious agenda »
Other controversial Bush measures Obama is expected to overturn are related to abortion and ****** planning.
U.S. State Department officials and ****** planning groups such as Planned Parenthood said they expect Obama to overturn the "Mexico City" policy, first instituted by the Reagan administration. The policy prevents taxpayer dollars from funding groups that perform or promote abortions overseas.
President Clinton dropped the order, but Bush re-implemented it and expanded the policy to ensure State Department funding does not go to ****** planning organizations that even counsel about abortion.
An Obama administration also could overturn the Bush administration policy of banning funding to organizations such as the U.N. Population Fund that operate in countries that practice ****** sterilization, including China, which adheres to the "one *****" policy.
Podesta said his team also is reviewing Bush's order that lifted restrictions on oil drilling on fragile federal lands in Utah. Environmental groups decried Bush's decision when he opened the lands to exploration this month, and Podesta called the decision a "mistake."
One set of executive orders that may take longer to overturn pertains to detainees at the Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, military prison.
Obama has said he wants to close the prison, but Denis McDonough, a senior adviser to the incoming Democrat, said Monday that no decisions have been made about what to do with the prison's 255 inmates.
"There is no process in place to make that decision until his national security and legal teams are assembled," McDonough said.
Reversing Bush's executive orders would be an immediate way for Obama to show that a new era has begun in Washington, said Jonathan Turley, a George Washington University law professor.
Premium Link Upgrade
A few good things in there.
But i'm still wondering what is all this panic to override drilling as soon as possible. Was it something the greener members of Democrats were demanding? Something to gain support in Utah? I have to admit my ignorance of this folder. Just looks like a bad move overall.
Is it related with the Canada-USA deal regarding Alberta petroleum? No more need to drill all over the land: our friendly neighboor will support us. (SIDENOTE - It is stated in the NAFTA, if both Canada and USA are lacking oil, the support towards USA prevails on the support to... Canada - do you know how canadians are pissed at that?).
Yet, those drilling considerations are just speculative as i have no real knowledge on the subject.
But i'm still wondering what is all this panic to override drilling as soon as possible. Was it something the greener members of Democrats were demanding? Something to gain support in Utah? I have to admit my ignorance of this folder. Just looks like a bad move overall.
Is it related with the Canada-USA deal regarding Alberta petroleum? No more need to drill all over the land: our friendly neighboor will support us. (SIDENOTE - It is stated in the NAFTA, if both Canada and USA are lacking oil, the support towards USA prevails on the support to... Canada - do you know how canadians are pissed at that?).
Yet, those drilling considerations are just speculative as i have no real knowledge on the subject.
Cuz we are gonna drill in Canada!..hehehehe and get all of your nice looking women...oops of the topic...yikes my bad.
:violent: yeah commucracia!
