j_b

Are you saying you didn't slam the Greeks like all the others conservative nitwits? you could have fooled me, jackass. You don't even have the courage to acknowledge what you said a few hours earlier, it is therefore no surprise you won't acknowledge your support for the conservative policies that took us the brink

"The irony here is that both sets of actions are self destructive, and both are rooted in the same reflex. In each case, a social compact under strain has been pushed to its breaking point by the crisis aftermath. You can argue that the Greek arrangements were ripe for breakdown, given the country’s chronic fiscal deficits, accommodative posture towards wealthy tax evaders, and acceptance of bribery as a way of doing business. But as dysfunctional as it looks, it functioned nevertheless. And now that it is breaking down, many citizens are striking out at the parties they think have sold them out: the banks and government officials. This too has a certain logic. Many studies have found people will spend time and effort to punish cheaters, even if they wind up worse off as a result (I’m not saying the violence is effective or aimed at the right targets, merely that this kind of reaction isn’t surprising). Although the reaction of the German citizenry looks more reasoned, it too ultimately is self destructive. Even though the Greek model was (arguably) based on corruption and the German on hard work and thrift, the German was ever bit as unsustainable precisely because it was overly export dependent. That meant it required countries that would go into debt to buy its exports. Germany and Greece are not independent phenomena; they are merely two sides of the same coin. And many Germans seem as keen to punish profligate debtors as Greeks are to punish the banks and officials they think sold them out." http://www.roubini.com/euro-monitor/258834/greece__germany__and_the_dangers_of_beggar_thy_neighbor

As if you knew jackshit about the situation in Greece; yet, here you are, not wasting a moment to pontificate and accuse an entire people of wrong doing. Shame on you.

Right, and the Times of London is a Murdock rag (FOX's owner) that is stridently anti-Euro. Always trust the leeches to accuse others of being freeloaders.

Well, I did ask the question first but I also don't recall any of the people who are invoking a defense of the constitution today wanting to defend it against Bush and his cronies. Why did you guys wait for so long to discover that document was so precious to you?

Did I ever mention that places like Somalia and Afghanistan are much better suited for your type? You and your guns should consider moving there permanently on you own dime.

You didn't think that serving for Bush's lies and cautioning his assault on civil liberties wasn't serving the constitution. Well, that's probably a little late for you to claim so.

As if serving for a lie amounted to defending the constitution. Spare us the drivel, jackass.

why do you invoke the defense of the constitution to execute Americans when you apparently didn't defend it when you had the chance to do so against systemic abuse?

You forgot the important part of the oath imo..as it relates to this conversation... "I, (NAME), do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; so, what did you do when Bush and his cronies trampled the constitution almost every day?

U.S. Said to Allow Drilling Without Needed Permits By IAN URBINA WASHINGTON — The federal Minerals Management Service gave permission to BP and dozens of other oil companies to drill in the Gulf of Mexico without first getting required permits from another agency that assesses threats to endangered species — and despite strong warnings from that agency about the impact the drilling was likely to have on the gulf. Those approvals, federal records show, include one for the well drilled by the Deepwater Horizon rig, which exploded on April 20, killing 11 workers and resulting in thousands of barrels of oil spilling into the gulf each day. more: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/05/14/us/14agency.html?

that's nice. What about Kerry gutting the Clean Air Act?

Just imagine that it was especially safe and efficient because it was unregulated according to the nitwits. If the gusher can't be stopped, it will be the largest spill in history. Essentially none of it will be remediated.

Spew already likely bigger than Exxon Valdez. Initial oil flow rates grossly underestimated:

the following limestone quarry is said to be on Orcas: from here (you may find it useful): http://www.nps.gov/history/history/online_books/geology/publications/state/wa/uw-1927-2/

Don't give them any more stupid ideas. They truly appear capable of anything.

[video:youtube]

Climate Bill Is a Misnomer: It’s a Nuclear Energy-Promoting, Oil Drilling-Championing, Coal Mining-Boosting Gift to Polluters Statement of Tyson Slocum, Director of Public Citizen’s Energy Program After half a year of delay, Sens. John Kerry (D-Mass.) and Joe Lieberman (I-Conn.) are set to release their nuclear energy/cap-and-trade bill today. Until we see legislative text, we can comment only on the broad outline made available yesterday and an additional summary being circulated among legislative staff. It’s not accurate to call this a climate bill. This is nuclear energy-promoting, oil drilling-championing, coal mining-boosting legislation with a weak carbon-pricing mechanism thrown in. What’s worse, it guts the Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) current authority to regulate greenhouse gases as pollutants under the Clean Air Act. Here’s our take on what we know is in the new bill: Nuclear Power Incentives At its core, this legislation is all about promoting nuclear power and handing taxpayers the bill. Consider: - Sections 1101 and 1105 would prioritize the needs of nuclear power corporations over the rights of citizens to have full, public hearings about the risks and dangers of locating nuclear power plants in their communities. - Section 1102 increases loan guarantees primarily for nuclear power to a jaw-dropping $54 billion. These loans are a terrible deal for the taxpayer, especially considering the high risk of default that even the government acknowledges. - Section 1103 provides $6 billion in taxpayer-subsidized risk insurance for 12 new nuclear reactors. - Section 1121 allows nuclear power plant owners to write off their depreciation much faster. Section 1121 provides a 10 percent investment tax credit for new reactors. - Section 1123 extends the Advanced Energy Project credit to nuclear reactors. - Section 1124-6 allows municipal power agencies to derive certain tax, bond and grant benefits from investing in nuclear power. Oil Apparently oblivious to the ongoing disaster in the Gulf of Mexico, the legislation expands offshore drilling. In fact, all new offshore drilling, leasing and permitting should be halted. Section 1202 allows states to keep 37.5 percent of oil and gas royalty money. That’s like saying because more rich people live in California and New York compared to Mississippi and New Mexico, those higher-income states should be able to keep more federal dollars raised from income taxes. Royalty revenue sharing is patently unfair – especially because the disaster in Gulf shows that an oil spill does not respect state boundaries. Coal Section 1412 establishes a carbon tax paid by ratepayers and collected by utilities to fund carbon capture and storage (CCS) – with no money allocated to rooftop solar or energy efficiency investments. Section 1431 will provide valuable emissions allowances for free to coal utilities pursuing CCS – an untested, risky strategy that benefits the coal industry and is gobbling up a lion’s share of subsidies that otherwise could go to renewable energy development. Merchant coal power plants (whose rates are not regulated) will get roughly 5 percent of the free allowances, which will provide opportunities for them to gouge consumers. And while the nuclear and coal industries will receive a lot of taxpayer money and loan guarantees, Section 1604 states that “voluntary” renewable energy markets are “efficient and effective programs” and states that “the policy of the United States is to continue to support the growth of these markets.” This is backward: Renewable energy should be getting the guarantees, rather than the coal and nuclear industries. Offsets The legislation allows entities to “reduce” their domestic greenhouse gas emissions by purchasing offsets from projects located in the U.S. and around the world. The recent offset crisis in Europe, where the offset market collapsed due to fraud, underscores the lack of accountability and transparency with offsets. Consumer Protections Rather than follow President Barack Obama’s cap-and-dividend plan, which would have required polluters to pay and would have distributed 80 percent of the money directly to families through the Making Work Pay tax credit, or the Cantwell-Collins CLEAR Act, which calls for distributing monthly checks to households, the Kerry-Lieberman approach relies on distributing valuable free allowances to utilities from 2013-2029, then requiring that utilities use the money “exclusively for the benefit of the ratepayers.” But Congress won’t be defining “benefit”; rather, 50 different state utility commissions will. Some will do a great job, but most will allow utilities to structure expensive energy efficiency programs that benefit shareholders more than ratepayers. Wall Street It appears that Wall Street may not have gotten everything it wanted – yet. The legislation appears to incorporate elements of S.1399, sponsored by Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), which creates an Office of Carbon Market Oversight at the Commodities Futures Trading Commission (CFTC), giving the agency authority to regulate spot and futures emission markets. It requires all entities seeking to trade emissions derivatives to register and be approved by the CFTC, and all transactions must be cleared through a CFTC-regulated Carbon Clearing Organization. This is a good start to ensure that Wall Street plays no role in gambling on climate policy. Danger remains, however, in creating carbon trading markets open to non-energy producers. Strong regulations in place today may be easily subverted tomorrow, leaving Wall Street positioned to control our climate future. Conclusion The Kerry-Lieberman bill represents a missed opportunity. By meeting behind closed doors, the lawmakers empowered corporate polluters to play an oversized role in influencing the legislation to the detriment of the climate and consumers. President Obama had it right when he successfully campaigned on a theme of making polluters pay and delivering benefits directly to households. We need a bill that does not incentivize failed and dangerous technologies like nuclear power and does not enrich utilities at the expense of consumers. http://www.citizen.org/pressroom/pressroomredirect.cfm?ID=3130

is that it?

How nice of the "librul media" to give airtime to nitwits as if there were nothing more relevant to discuss. I guess we also have to thank conservatives that this guy was ever put in charge of anything important. Shudder ..

So, my remarking that racist morons spew racist propaganda to justify having their policies kill countless Muslims is somehow "threat recognition"? Forget it dude. You don't make any sense whatsoever but if you think your racist propaganda is going fly unnoticed, you are quite mistaken, Adolf.

You are changing the subject, moron. I was answering JayB who has been claiming for the last 8 pages or so that the barbarian nature of the actions of Muslim extremists was somehow due to the Muslim faith because it was especially backward or some other islamophobic drivel. I only showed that many other types of people commit atrocities today and you somehow interjected that you couldn't care less about others.

You are changing the subject because nobody was talking about "prioritizing threats". Whether we or people across the pond are the subject of the violence doesn't make something more backward or whatever.

indeed, or even compared to traditional warfare. aren't we still financing 3 modes of delivering nuclear payloads? why the double talk?

is it really necessary to remind your stupid insensitive ass that ~5 million people were murdered in the Congo alone around the turn of the 21st century? I know, they are of no concern to you. Racist fuck.