Tim Kaine: "Climate change must be national security...."

[Crick]

Liberals believe the government has an obligation to protect humans from their own follies.

That condescending statement alone is why I distrust liberalism.

Only thing government has shown is its inefficiency at nearly everything it touches. Except the art of revenue collection.

This conversation has grown into pure politics and no longer belongs in the Environment Forum.

I think I can assume that you do not receive social security nor make use of Medicare, have never been protected or aided by police, firefighters or the military. You do not drive on the US interstate system, do not eat FDA inspected and approved foods, are not protected by the work of your local Health Department and the CDC. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

 

[petro]

Liberals believe the government has an obligation to protect humans from their own follies.

That condescending statement alone is why I distrust liberalism.

Only thing government has shown is its inefficiency at nearly everything it touches. Except the art of revenue collection.

This conversation has grown into pure politics and no longer belongs in the Environment Forum.

I think I can assume that you do not receive social security nor make use of Medicare, have never been protected or aided by police, firefighters or the military. You do not drive on the US interstate system, do not eat FDA inspected and approved foods, are not protected by the work of your local Health Department and the CDC. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Environmental policy is political.
Funny. All those construction vechicles on the highway are all sub contracted private firms hired by the government at inflated pricing.
I wasn't arguing against basic services either. Just the nanny state you seem to believe needs to control ignorant humans.

 

[Crick]

But comments about politicians being criminal or "the lowest of the low" are irrelevant and specious to any discussion of environmental policy.

If you do not mean to argue against basic services, I suggest you do not make such broad and condemnatory comments about the government as a whole.

 

[skookerasbil]

Liberals believe the government has an obligation to protect humans from their own follies.

That condescending statement alone is why I distrust liberalism.

Only thing government has shown is its inefficiency at nearly everything it touches. Except the art of revenue collection.

This conversation has grown into pure politics and no longer belongs in the Environment Forum.

I think I can assume that you do not receive social security nor make use of Medicare, have never been protected or aided by police, firefighters or the military. You do not drive on the US interstate system, do not eat FDA inspected and approved foods, are not protected by the work of your local Health Department and the CDC. Et cetera, et cetera, et cetera.

Man, you dumb......

The reason the dummies on your side are losing is ALL about the politics.. You, Mamooth and Old Rocks are the only ones who haven't yet received the memo.

 

[Votto]

Liberals believe the government has an obligation to protect humans from their own follies. The use of fossil fuel has turned out to be such a thing. And, again, this has nothing to do with the science. Unless you intend to suggest that liberals are falsifying data showing global warming and rising GHG levels. Do you?

That is a lie, it has everything to do with science.

After all, science is why we learned to exploit fossil fuels to begin with. So now that science says we need to fix the problem they created? Interesting, isn't it.

Know this, I will NEVER support any increase in taxes UNLESS it goes towards the infrastructure of building nuclear power plants, which will be sources of cheaper energy in the future. Unfortunately, the Left, whom you support, will never go along with that because they don't want solutions, they just feed off crisis to impose their will on us all.

Neither will I support things like the Paris Accord that, according to scientists, would have done virtually NOTHING about the issue other than just feel good about ourselves cuz they did "something". Trump was 100% about pulling out.

 

[petro]

But comments about politicians being criminal or "the lowest of the low" are irrelevant and specious to any discussion of environmental policy.

If you do not mean to argue against basic services, I suggest you do not make such broad and condemnatory comments about the government as a whole.

You made the argument in an Orwellian way that the government as a whole has an obligation to protect us from ourselves. I countered.

 

[Crick]

How does attacking Tim Kaine personally argue against the contention that the government has an obligation to protect its citizens?

 

[Votto]

How does attacking Tim Kaine personally argue against the contention that the government has an obligation to protect its citizens?

Protect us from what exactly?

 

[Pilot1]

How does attacking Tim Kaine personally argue against the contention that the government has an obligation to protect its citizens?

Government has a responsibility for National Defense and to secure our border. It has no responsibility, nor license to Social Engineer, and confiscate yet MORE money for a FALSE, self created issue. NONE.

 

[Crick]

AGW is not a "false, self created issue". The government DOES have a Constitutional obligation to "promote the general welfare".

PS, aside from text referring to invasions, where do you find in the Constitution an obligation to secure our borders?

The Constitution spells out the responsibilities of government and, primarily via the amendments, what it cannot do. What is not prohibited, is allowed. There is no proscription against social engineering.

 

[Votto]

AGW is not a "false, self created issue". The government DOES have a Constitutional obligation to "promote the general welfare".

Here is what Madison, the man who wrote the General Welfare clause, said about it.

“If Congress can employ money indefinitely to the general welfare, and are the sole and supreme judges of the general welfare, they may take the care of religion into their own hands; they may appoint teachers in every State, county and parish and pay them out of their public treasury; they may take into their own hands the education of children, establishing in like manner schools throughout the Union; they may assume the provision of the poor; they may undertake the regulation of all roads other than post-roads; in short, every thing, from the highest object of state legislation down to the most minute object of police, would be thrown under the power of Congress... Were the power of Congress to be established in the latitude contended for, it would subvert the very foundations, and transmute the very nature of the limited Government established by the people of America.”

Clearly Madison's intent has been subverted by people like you. In fact, there is virtually nothing that could be denied as for our "general welfare". All that is needed is for a coherent argument and a media to go along for the ride as to it's need.

 

[Crick]

I believe Madison's intent was that "defence and the general welfare" be taken as general terms elucidated and restricted by further comments in the text concerning the specific responsibilities and constraints lain on the Congress. I have no problem with this except I would much rather be debating whether or not AGW is a threat that needs to be addressed under the mantle of national security. I believe AGW is a threat to all nations and demands immediate and dramatic action to whatever extent the constitutions and laws of the various nations of the world allow.

 

[Billy_Bob]

Most people believe climate change is a hoax. Hardly national security.

Actually this is a National Security issue.

Democrook pseudo-scientists are engaged in a massive fraud and deliberate malpractice. Like a surgeon dropping a scalpel into your gut and sewing it in, so as to slowly bleed you to death from the inside so he can charge more money as you suffer and not have to solve the problem.

That's why we have independent coroners who can investigate, but who is investigating the scientists?

If this was a real issue, it would transcend politics. Or at least it should. Yet the very people who insist it's a problem, and that the "solution" is using less fuel are the assholes who use the most.

Like Border Security should not be an issue. The difference is that the people who insist that it is actually work to solve the problem.

.


.

As long as they can claim a crisis, that only they can solve by taking away your freedoms and ability to self sustain, they are happy.. They need poverty and being dependent on them to maintain populace control. The moment they are exposed as the frauds they are, they scream to have you silenced.

Its way past time to tar and feather these fools and run them out of town on a rail.

 

[Crick]

Billy, are your threatening violence? Did it not occur to you that might be a violation of the USMB rules?

 

[CrusaderFrank]

If it were about science and logic, its obvious CO2 is a rounding error but their solution is to take control of the US economy; not China or India, but US. So it's all political, its Marxism disguised as caring about the environment.

Ask them what their studies show about reducing CO2 to stop the climate from ever changing

Crickets

 

[Pilot1]

The climate changing naturally is a national security threat, but people coming here illegally that we know NOTHING about are not? Reinforces that Tim Kaine is an absolute IDIOT.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

AGW is not a "false, self created issue". The government DOES have a Constitutional obligation to "promote the general welfare".

PS, aside from text referring to invasions, where do you find in the Constitution an obligation to secure our borders?

The Constitution spells out the responsibilities of government and, primarily via the amendments, what it cannot do. What is not prohibited, is allowed. There is no proscription against social engineering.

China. Does this mean war with China?

 

[leftwinger]

If it were about science and logic, its obvious CO2 is a rounding error but their solution is to take control of the US economy; not China or India, but US. So it's all political, its Marxism disguised as caring about the environment.

Ask them what their studies show about reducing CO2 to stop the climate from ever changing

Crickets

Or the many Ice Ages that came and went before "fossil fuels". The weather has always been changing.

 

[Pilot1]

China. Does this mean war with China?

It should mean War with the Democrats. They are more anti American than the Chinese.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

Fuck. CO2 war with China