Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Posted
I move to the front of the line at red lights, too. That's my prerogative, as a cyclist. Today I moved ahead of nearly two dozen cars, ran the red light and cut off a school bus.

 

All the rightwingers in their SUV's get all bent out of shape about it, but I know it's just because their colon is full of impacted stools from clenching their ass in rage all the time.

 

Sure they're not closet-fixie riders angry that you're wearing a helmet and using gears, you yuppie poser?

 

 

  • Replies 612
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Posted
I move to the front of the line at red lights, too. That's my prerogative, as a cyclist. Today I moved ahead of nearly two dozen cars, ran the red light and cut off a school bus. All the rightwingers in their SUV's get all bent out of shape about it, but I know it's just because their colon is full of impacted stools from clenching their ass in rage all the time.

 

I don't think you should have to stop at any red lights myself, slow down and look sure - and bikes should only have to yield if it's red and someone is coming the other way through the green. We might get that changed into law down here. Bikes won't have red lights, red lights will mean caution and yield. Why should a bike even have to stop if no one is there? Total bullshit. Bikes rule.

Posted
Now is your chance to put all of us those who have had the temerity to doubt the heroic magnitude of your personal sacrifices on behalf of the planet in our place. Post all of the details of your footprint here so that we can hail your eco-virtue with the proper amount of deference and rectitude.

 

isn't this just sort of snide backhanded name calling with bigger words? :lmao:

 

Yes - all the more reason to post up those annual BTU, Kilowatt-hour, and gallon consumption stats in order to silence the mockery from the regressive-warmongering-crypto-fascist-right-wingers in the peanut gallery.

Posted
Sure they're not closet-fixie riders angry that you're wearing a helmet and using gears, you yuppie poser?

 

Yes. The fixie riders are all too busy walking their bikes up capitol hill. :lmao:

Posted

Now is your chance to put all of us those who have had the temerity to doubt the heroic magnitude of your personal sacrifices on behalf of the planet in our place. Post all of the details of your footprint here so that we can hail your eco-virtue with the proper amount of deference and rectitude.

 

Your hypocrisy knows no bound. it's people like you who want to make it solely a personal issue, whereas I have done the exact opposite. As far as personal responsibility is concerned I have called for energy conservation for literally decades, which your type has ridiculed like forever.

Posted
I'd personally rather have it done off the shores of countries that aren't either run by a cadre of religious fanatics that will funnel the proceeds into jihad academies, or third world basket cases that haven't demonstrated the capacity to manage their sewage properly.

 

Probably not these dudes either...

 

Why Norway's offshore drilling is safer

Statoil operates the most environmentally friendly offshore oil rigs in the world -- because it's state-owned

By Joe Conason

 

If anyone still believes we must drill, baby, drill offshore -- aside from Bill Kristol, that is, who wants to sink wells even closer to precious coastal wetlands -- then perhaps it is time to consider again the potential benefits of nationalization. After all, there is one country that has established an unrivaled record for environmental safety while exploiting its offshore petroleum reserves. That would be Norway, which created the company now known as Statoil Hydro as a fully state-owned entity and still controls nearly two-thirds of the company's "privatized" shares.

 

The Wall Street Journal reported last week that Statoil rigs in the North Sea are required by law to maintain special "acoustic switches" that shut down operations completely (and remotely) in case of a blowout or explosion. The US Mines and Minerals Service, under the industry-friendly Bush administration, decided that rigs operating in American waters need not install those switches because they are "very costly." At $500,000 per switch, they now look like an enormous bargain, of course.

 

What makes Norway so different from the United States -- and much more likely to install the most protective energy technology -- is that the Norwegian state can impose public values on oil producers without fighting off lobbyists and crooked politicians, because it owns and controls the resources. Rather than Halliburton-style corporate management controlling the government and blocking environmental improvement, Norway's system works the other way around. It isn't perfect, as any Nordic environmentalist will ardently explain, but the results are considerably better than ours.

 

Just ask Freedomworks, the right-wing corporate front group chaired by former Texas Republican Rep. Dick Armey, which has underwritten the Tea Party movement. In a post advocating more offshore drilling, Freedomworks hailed the Norwegian record effusively:

 

Norway's oil and gas offshore operations have safely and effectively co-existed with fishing operations in the fertile North Sea since 1971. In fact, Norway is now the world's sixth largest oil producer and the tenth largest fish producer.

 

Freedomworks hates socialism, so its promo copy doesn't mention the state ownership. But ideological concerns aside, the Norwegian oil business has earned a strong international reputation for industrial efficiency and environmentally benign exploration and production technology. Unlike the U.S. oil giants, which feign green concern while opposing real climate reform, Statoil has worked actively to reduce its CO2 emissions since 1991, with considerable success. Again, this is a result of harmony between national policy, aiming to make Norway carbon neutral by 2030, and the state oil sector. Rather than debate the need for stronger environmental regulation with powerful private interests for the past quarter-century, the Norwegians were able to harness the profits of their oil resources to improve the environment (and provide a generous social security and universal healthcare system for their people).

 

But we know that private ownership always works better than government. Don't we?

--from here.

Posted

Now is your chance to put all of us those who have had the temerity to doubt the heroic magnitude of your personal sacrifices on behalf of the planet in our place. Post all of the details of your footprint here so that we can hail your eco-virtue with the proper amount of deference and rectitude.

 

Your hypocrisy knows no bound. it's people like you who want to make it solely a personal issue, whereas I have done the exact opposite. As far as personal responsibility is concerned I have called for energy conservation for literally decades, which your type has ridiculed like forever.

 

Translation: j_b's carbon footprint is almost as large and hypocritical as Al Gore's.

Posted

Now is your chance to put all of us those who have had the temerity to doubt the heroic magnitude of your personal sacrifices on behalf of the planet in our place. Post all of the details of your footprint here so that we can hail your eco-virtue with the proper amount of deference and rectitude.

 

Your hypocrisy knows no bound. it's people like you who want to make it solely a personal issue, whereas I have done the exact opposite. As far as personal responsibility is concerned I have called for energy conservation for literally decades, which your type has ridiculed like forever.

 

Translation: j_b's carbon footprint is almost as large and hypocritical as Al Gore's.

 

If that's true I've got to get to know j_b better, cuz Gore's got one mfkn rockin crib.

Posted
I've been a bike or foot commuter for all but ~3.5 years since 1992

 

tooting his horn right before he claimed I was tooting my horn for being virtuous, which I didn't do. Such predictable low handed techniques.

 

, *and* I shill for the oil industry.

 

Offshore drilling will increase for the indefinite future. Any suggestion to the contrary is a fantasy. Auto traffic accounts for ~35% of all transport related oil consumption, which is itself responsible for ~2/3rds of total oil consumption

 

of course JayB isn't going to mention here his opposition to reigning in the automobile industry or any other regulation of the oil sector, or clamping down on urban sprawl or his support for perpetual war in oil rich regions

 

, or about ~23% of the total when all is said and done. Every single car in the US could vanish tomorrow and there'd still be sufficient global demand to drive more exploration and drilling. There's no realistic substitute for petroleum in the vast majority of applications that currently require it.

 

and here, he won't mention his refusal to finance a Manhattan project like effort to finance R&D for renewable energy.

 

So you see folks, we can't do anything about it and conservative nitwits especially won't give us the means to do differently. A perfect synopsis for regressive policies for just about every major problem we face.

Posted

Now is your chance to put all of us those who have had the temerity to doubt the heroic magnitude of your personal sacrifices on behalf of the planet in our place. Post all of the details of your footprint here so that we can hail your eco-virtue with the proper amount of deference and rectitude.

 

Your hypocrisy knows no bound. it's people like you who want to make it solely a personal issue, whereas I have done the exact opposite. As far as personal responsibility is concerned I have called for energy conservation for literally decades, which your type has ridiculed like forever.

 

Sorry kemosabe, but by calling everyone else out on their energy consumption you've made an issue of your own. Per your logic, if Tiger Woods had been a vocal advocate for chastity and fidelity, there'd be no grounds for anyone to criticize him for his philandering.

 

As far as my own hypocrisy is concerned - lets take a look at that on this particular issue. Isn't hypocrisy practicing one thing while preaching another? In this case - I suppose I'm guilty of practicing something that reduces my oil consumption without preaching for others to do so. Guilty!

 

No post up those personal consumption stats so that we can all collectively bask in the warm glow of your eco-sainthood.

Posted

While diesel's carbon footprint may not be as visible as gasoline's, the particulate matter ejecta is off the charts! You really should sell that old Jetta and walk to work...um, I mean, to the counselor's office, um, the smoke shop, social services office, the Bellingham basement soviet, um, or wherever it is you spend your unproductive life.

Posted (edited)

It'd be cool to compare our utilities usage percentiles as well as the number of vegan yoga babes we've nailed and track the correlation.

 

'course, summa you poor fucks live on the eastside, but at least you got the perky plastic boob thing goin for ya out there. We'll give ya a quarter point per faux blonde.

Edited by tvashtarkatena

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...