116th Congress

And the energy / enviromental aims of Mr O'Neill's political brand ?

What (R) House member is advancing far reaching goals ? Any far reaching goals - in any area
 
no one is attaching the other half of the proposal - Sen Merkley of Oregon
Hmmm wonder what that is all about

and perhaps this bill goes no where. The necessity of facing our energy / environmental issues will not go away.

So let me ask again what is the (R) counter approach ?
Coal ?
 
Obvious by their campaign tactics of personal demonetization rather than policy proposals

(R) lacks ideas. Have since 1980 when they were given the keys to the car of state.
But boy do they have some oppo research guys

and even the ideas they pushed in 1980 have proven to be disastrous . Witness Donald Trump.

So again (R) what are your energy / environmental proposals ?
 
Nobody is doing personal attacks.

They are, in fact, attacking horrible ideas

Replace every building in the country? Eliminate cows? This is how Trump will win. This is why Pelosi is mocking them
 
sturg33 said:
Nobody is doing personal attacks.

//////////////////////////////////

https://www.cnn.com/2018/11/01/politics/willie-horton-ad-1988-explainer-trnd/index.html '88
https://www.nytimes.com/1992/10/08/...s-clinton-s-account-vietnam-era-protests.html '92
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2004/11/mccain200411 2000
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Kerry_military_service_controversy 2004
Obama 2008-2012 pick one
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hillary_Clinton_email_controversy 2016
//////////////////

They are, in fact, attacking horrible ideas
oh ?


Replace every building in the country?
Eliminate cows? This is how Trump will win.
I would think you would have learned how to read blogs since the disastrous 79% claim
the three times I've asked, yet there appears to be no opposite view other than "we cant do it ... "





This is why Pelosi is mocking them

Your political naivete is showing , Pelosi does not mock her caucus in public or the press.
Click to expand...

you are a walking solution in search of a problem.
 
Last edited:
Josh Kraushaar
‏Verified account @HotlineJosh

One provision in Green New Deal:

“Expanding high-speed rail to ‘a scale where air travel stops becoming necessary’”


Clayton Cubitt
‏Verified account @claytoncubitt
17m17 minutes ago

Clayton Cubitt Retweeted Josh Kraushaar

I took a bullet train in Japan one time that went 200/mph
and was so quiet and smooth it was like sitting still. It was ****in
space-age awesome and nobody should be able to chant “USA! USA!”
until we have better.
 
That’s actually one of the best ideas. Air travel is straight trash. Anyone who’s experienced a good high-speed train network and prefers air travel for shorter-haul travel has been huffing paint or something.
 
most refreshing to me in the new class of legislators is frequent use of the words "opportunity" and "possible"

The language of JFK and Obama.
FDR
 
[Tw]1093586119034327040[/tw]

As someone who gets a good laugh out of the electricity socialism joke... I look forward to going back in time where we dont have planes and cars again.
 
All you had to do was not be crazy... but President Trump should go ahead and get comfy

[Tw]1093638801413623809[/tw]
 
You could make a pretty good case that Anerica’s addiction to 1-person/1-car travel and cheap gas has—whatever its upside in empowerment and growth—come with a significant and mostly unacknowledged downside in externalities like ecological damage and public health effects, market-distorting subsidies and preferences for industry, to say nothing of decades of military adventurism in oil-producing regions. It’s way past time to have a public conversation that includes frank discussion of the costs involved, in both directions. I’m not sure how practical any proposed remedies would be, but I’m pleased to see the conversation start.
 
Julio3000 said:
You could make a pretty good case that Anerica’s addiction to 1-person/1-car travel and cheap gas has—whatever its upside in empowerment and growth—come with a significant and mostly unacknowledged downside in externalities like ecological damage and public health effects, market-distorting subsidies and preferences for industry, to say nothing of decades of military adventurism in oil-producing regions. It’s way past time to have a public conversation that includes frank discussion of the costs involved, in both directions. I’m not sure how practical any proposed remedies would be, but I’m pleased to see the conversation start.
Click to expand...

First of all, it is impossible for me to take anyone seriously who has read this proposal and not completely dismissed it as laughable nonsense.

Second of all, if we somehow implemented this, it would do nothing to solve the China and India problem which is the actual problem.

Third of all, if we implemented this, we'd have no money to do anything ever again, and.our GDP would collapse as we go back to horse carriages.

I have no clue what healthcare and free money for people unwilling to work has to do withh climate change...

The only reason we can even talk about doing big idea is because we are rich... This is the fastest way to get to Venezuela.

Y'all cant actually be taking this seriously, are you? Y'all can't keep mocking me for saying the left has lost its mind when you endorse eliminating cows, cars and planes (seriously would love to hear how that works in reality)
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top