Rand Paul Rips an Eco-Nanny a New One

[dilloduck]

It's totalitarian to claim ownership of a planet that was there before you and will be there after you. You didn't build the planet, you don't have the right to speed up its tear down either.

yet you claim the right to define "tear down" and present us with bogus science to prove it ?

I'm sorry, is oil a renewable resource?

no--It's a temporary resource that we would like to use until you can find something else that is practical and affordable enough so we all ( including you ) can live the life style we are used to.
Tearing something down without an alternative isn't something honest people will tolerate.

 

[Avorysuds]

Right, Oddball. It's none of my business that Humans want to be gluttons about the Earth's resources, there's ways to stimy the future effects of it and you're going to cry like it's yours yours yours. You're blessed to have been BORN, and further, you're blessed to have been BORN FREE. Get over yourself.

Are you trying to imply that doing an Abortion does not use any resources?

Secondly you have absolutely missed the entire point didn’t you? Rand Paul’s point was you're pro choice when it comes to something as controversial as abortion (undeniably) but drop the hammer on a light bulb or toilet when in fact the "replacement" offered is no more efficient.

Light bulbs that produce so much less light that people add more lamps… Toilets that don’t flush correctly so you flush 2-3 times… I mean, this is not rocket science for a topic.

I understand and agree that the replacements should be more efficient otherwise, what's the point? But I disagree that someone is coming and taking your "Freedom to Pollute" when there's Laws designed to conserve the very Earth we live on.

I'm not sure what non-renewable resources Abortion uses, either....but you have to admit, he's not only pointing out Environmentalists' hypocrisy by drawing the comparison..........that is........unless he *doesn't* want to tell Women what to do.

Right, and the problem is the replacement is not better, so what's the point of her job, why do we pay them money to do nothing?

Rand Paul does not want to tell someone they can't have an abortion necessarily, he does not want Government paying for it. While I'm pro choice I can see and agree with that concept as plain as day...

Pretending that a Republican wants the option to pollute more is a ugly and false argument... The Democrats have been in charge and done NOTHING to change pollution, because it's about how individual people choose to live their lives that will make the difference.

In the end a hybrid does not pollute any less than most other cars. The new electric cars are near 100% oil dependent as the oil is now converted to electricity is all. We have not moved an inch, if anything we are slowly going backwards.

 

[mnbasketball]

None of it is any of your business, tovarich.

YOU say, polluting our environment is none of our business. Well then whose business is it since what you pollute ends up hurting people and causing problems for our kids.

So if I do something to you then it's nobody's business except MINE?

Can you imagine what our country would be like right now without any regulations? Factories would still be dumping chemicals in the farmers back 40 that worked for them.
The coal companies wouldn't have done anything to stop pollution of the air.
Our water supply would be undrinkable. Whats wrong with conservation if you want to be part of our nation?

Should everyone be able to do what ever they want? Why are we shipping NUK bi-products across the nation to be buried in caves, why not just put it your back yards.

Man you people are ******* retarded.

 

[G.T.]

yet you claim the right to define "tear down" and present us with bogus science to prove it ?

I'm sorry, is oil a renewable resource?

no--It's a temporary resource that we would like to use until you can find something else that is practical and affordable enough so we all ( including you ) can live the life style we are used to.
Tearing something down without an alternative isn't something honest people will tolerate.

And when there becomes viable alternatives to somethings destructive to the very planet that allows us life...........it's not sticking your nose in anyone's personal business. It's preventing that, in fact.

 

[G.T.]

Are you trying to imply that doing an Abortion does not use any resources?

Secondly you have absolutely missed the entire point didn’t you? Rand Paul’s point was you're pro choice when it comes to something as controversial as abortion (undeniably) but drop the hammer on a light bulb or toilet when in fact the "replacement" offered is no more efficient.

Light bulbs that produce so much less light that people add more lamps… Toilets that don’t flush correctly so you flush 2-3 times… I mean, this is not rocket science for a topic.

I understand and agree that the replacements should be more efficient otherwise, what's the point? But I disagree that someone is coming and taking your "Freedom to Pollute" when there's Laws designed to conserve the very Earth we live on.

I'm not sure what non-renewable resources Abortion uses, either....but you have to admit, he's not only pointing out Environmentalists' hypocrisy by drawing the comparison..........that is........unless he *doesn't* want to tell Women what to do.

Right, and the problem is the replacement is not better, so what's the point of her job, why do we pay them money to do nothing?

Rand Paul does not want to tell someone they can't have an abortion necessarily, he does not want Government paying for it. While I'm pro choice I can see and agree with that concept as plain as day...

Pretending that a Republican wants the option to pollute more is a ugly and false argument... The Democrats have been in charge and done NOTHING to change pollution, because it's about how individual people choose to live their lives that will make the difference.

In the end a hybrid does not pollute any less than most other cars. The new electric cars are near 100% oil dependent as the oil is now converted to electricity is all. We have not moved an inch, if anything we are slowly going backwards.

His point is that it's none of anyone's business if his choices pollute, it says so in the opening paragraph. I'm not arguing that the replacements can and have been retarded, I'm arguing that YES, it is EVERYone's business when people engage in poor choices for our (Humanity's) home planet.

 

[kiwiman127]

yet you claim the right to define "tear down" and present us with bogus science to prove it ?

I'm sorry, is oil a renewable resource?

no--It's a temporary resource that we would like to use until you can find something else that is practical and affordable enough so we all ( including you ) can live the life style we are used to.
Tearing something down without an alternative isn't something honest people will tolerate.

While the US's economic competitors expand the usage of alternative energy to limit the harmful effect fossil fuels has placed on their environment and people, while planning for the future, the right wants us to twiddle our thumbs.
When the the far right said they wanted their country back, I think they meant back(wards).

 

[dilloduck]

I'm sorry, is oil a renewable resource?

no--It's a temporary resource that we would like to use until you can find something else that is practical and affordable enough so we all ( including you ) can live the life style we are used to.
Tearing something down without an alternative isn't something honest people will tolerate.

And when there becomes a viable alternatives to somethings destructive to the very planet that allows us life...........it's not sticking your nose in anyone's personal business. It's preventing that, in fact.

What is preventing anyone for developing alternatives ? We live now---not tomorrow. You happily use petrochemicals yet condemn others for doing the same.

 

[Avorysuds]

You wants to use our resources....you gots to pay the price

Screw you!

I got mine

If they pay for what they use, which they do, it's none of your business.

Which is the whole point....You're sticking your nose in where it doesn't belong, under the pretext that you know what's in everyone else's best interests better than they do.

False. The planet and the future of the planet is NOT YOURS. Get over it. It's everyone's. If there's Laws to preserve it, keep it clean, etc. that's not sticking anyone's nose where it doesn't belong.......that's the opposite.

By dirtying the planet, and by being frivolous about using its resources, YOU'RE STICKING YOUR NOSE WHERE IT DOESN'T BELONG.

Whew, thank god for you... I bet you use less than any republican and pollute less on a daily basis...

You have provided the “feel good moral higher ground” argument over and over. Now prove Rand Paul was not addressing the fact that the Government program he was talking about and too in the video has ultimately failed at what they claim to be doing.

That’s the difference between and true conservative and near everyone else, if something does not work then use the principle of dissolve it and wait for something better… Other pretend that if you give a failing/failed program more money it will all of a sudden produce results, too bad it NEVER WORKS LIKE THAT.


BTW, git off whatever oil based energy using computer you're on please, before you help destroy the planet more? LOL, I'll bet you will get right on it... Nice shoes btw… Oh don’t get angryt and drive off in your pollution free car.

 

[dilloduck]

I'm sorry, is oil a renewable resource?

no--It's a temporary resource that we would like to use until you can find something else that is practical and affordable enough so we all ( including you ) can live the life style we are used to.
Tearing something down without an alternative isn't something honest people will tolerate.

While the US's economic competitors expand the usage of alternative energy to limit the harmful effect fossil fuels has placed on their environment and people, while planning for the future, the right wants us to twiddle our thumbs.
When the the far right said they wanted their country back, I think they meant back(wards).

Bring on the nukes ! Oh ya---we can't.

 

[mnbasketball]

The Straight Dope: Do "green" vehicles really save energy? Is a Prius worse for the environment than a Hummer?
Read and learn, but real all of it not just a sentence here or there.

 

[xsited1]

Right, Oddball. It's none of my business that Humans want to be gluttons about the Earth's resources, there's ways to stimy the future effects of it and you're going to cry like it's yours yours yours. You're blessed to have been BORN, and further, you're blessed to have been BORN FREE. Get over yourself.

You're a proponent of central planning. That never works out and invariably leads to socialist or fascist oppression and tyranny and the serfdom of the individual.

 

[Avorysuds]

I understand and agree that the replacements should be more efficient otherwise, what's the point? But I disagree that someone is coming and taking your "Freedom to Pollute" when there's Laws designed to conserve the very Earth we live on.

I'm not sure what non-renewable resources Abortion uses, either....but you have to admit, he's not only pointing out Environmentalists' hypocrisy by drawing the comparison..........that is........unless he *doesn't* want to tell Women what to do.

Right, and the problem is the replacement is not better, so what's the point of her job, why do we pay them money to do nothing?

Rand Paul does not want to tell someone they can't have an abortion necessarily, he does not want Government paying for it. While I'm pro choice I can see and agree with that concept as plain as day...

Pretending that a Republican wants the option to pollute more is a ugly and false argument... The Democrats have been in charge and done NOTHING to change pollution, because it's about how individual people choose to live their lives that will make the difference.

In the end a hybrid does not pollute any less than most other cars. The new electric cars are near 100% oil dependent as the oil is now converted to electricity is all. We have not moved an inch, if anything we are slowly going backwards.

His point is that it's none of anyone's business if his choices pollute, it says so in the opening paragraph. I'm not arguing that the replacements can and have been retarded, I'm arguing that YES, it is EVERYone's business when people engage in poor choices for our (Humanity's) home planet.

Here is the real answer... and plz try and follow it.

Rand Paul is a Republican/Conservative so you can't won't and do not agree with him. You will directly miss quote or partially quote him as to prove why you don't agree with him.

That's the end of the story. Go on polluting today sir as I know you will =D

 

[blastoff]

What bugs me about these lefty idiots is they rarely think their crazy ideas through. Take the new CFL bulbs they're now pushing that we will some day be required to buy instead of incandescent ones. Seen the recommended clean up procedures if you break one? If not, you should look it up. The CFLs contain mercury so thus the need to take precautions vs. how we clean up after an incandescent bulb.

But how do they get the word out to every person who'll ever have to clean up a CFL? And by the time - maybe years later - someone actually has to clean one up are they going to remember the involved procedure? I'm betting many won't. Hell, we have millions of morons who can't even fill out a voting ballot properly at election time, so it's a given IMO lots of folks will just sweep up or vacuum the debris and that'll be that. Loose mercury 1 - consumer safety 0.

And what about natural disasters once CFLs are everywhere? What happens to all the bad stuff in them when a tornado or hurricane flattens or seriously damages God knows how many homes and businesses? Seems to me the result will be exposure for lots of folks in such an affected area, but the do-gooders don't seem to be concerned about it.

 

[G.T.]

no--It's a temporary resource that we would like to use until you can find something else that is practical and affordable enough so we all ( including you ) can live the life style we are used to.
Tearing something down without an alternative isn't something honest people will tolerate.

And when there becomes a viable alternatives to somethings destructive to the very planet that allows us life...........it's not sticking your nose in anyone's personal business. It's preventing that, in fact.

What is preventing anyone for developing alternatives ? We live now---not tomorrow. You happily use petrochemicals yet condemn others for doing the same.

I'm not "condemning," that's sensationalism. I do use stuff that's bad for the Earth. Every DAY, I do.

And water flows the path of least resistance. It's sad but it's not very tough to admit it. I'm all for making harmful things no longer the least path of resistance. Humans are flawed.

 

[G.T.]

Right, and the problem is the replacement is not better, so what's the point of her job, why do we pay them money to do nothing?

Rand Paul does not want to tell someone they can't have an abortion necessarily, he does not want Government paying for it. While I'm pro choice I can see and agree with that concept as plain as day...

Pretending that a Republican wants the option to pollute more is a ugly and false argument... The Democrats have been in charge and done NOTHING to change pollution, because it's about how individual people choose to live their lives that will make the difference.

In the end a hybrid does not pollute any less than most other cars. The new electric cars are near 100% oil dependent as the oil is now converted to electricity is all. We have not moved an inch, if anything we are slowly going backwards.

His point is that it's none of anyone's business if his choices pollute, it says so in the opening paragraph. I'm not arguing that the replacements can and have been retarded, I'm arguing that YES, it is EVERYone's business when people engage in poor choices for our (Humanity's) home planet.

Here is the real answer... and plz try and follow it.

Rand Paul is a Republican/Conservative so you can't won't and do not agree with him. You will directly miss quote or partially quote him as to prove why you don't agree with him.

That's the end of the story. Go on polluting today sir as I know you will =D

I didn't misquote him.

 

[Oddball]

Did he call it, or what?

After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the government then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence: it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

Alexis de Tocqueville - Democracy in America, Volume II (1840); Book Four, Chapter VI

 

[G.T.]

Right, Oddball. It's none of my business that Humans want to be gluttons about the Earth's resources, there's ways to stimy the future effects of it and you're going to cry like it's yours yours yours. You're blessed to have been BORN, and further, you're blessed to have been BORN FREE. Get over yourself.

You're a proponent of central planning. That never works out and invariably leads to socialist or fascist oppression and tyranny and the serfdom of the individual.

You think that people will be good enough people to choose, all on their own, to not adversely effect others and the planet, while simultaneously not thinking they're good enough to be representatives of Society via Government.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying that EVERY WAY FORWARD, is flawed.

 

[G.T.]

Did he call it, or what?

After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the government then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence: it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

Alexis de Tocqueville - Democracy in America, Volume II (1840); Book Four, Chapter VI

You're an idiot to assume the paragraph is necessarily true simply because you see people agreeing with Government acts.....but then..........you'd have to totally ignore every time that they disagree which blows the tripe pretty clean out of the water.

There's this other stuff in life for thinking people: it's called gray area.

 

[dilloduck]

Right, Oddball. It's none of my business that Humans want to be gluttons about the Earth's resources, there's ways to stimy the future effects of it and you're going to cry like it's yours yours yours. You're blessed to have been BORN, and further, you're blessed to have been BORN FREE. Get over yourself.

You're a proponent of central planning. That never works out and invariably leads to socialist or fascist oppression and tyranny and the serfdom of the individual.

You think that people will be good enough people to choose, all on their own, to not adversely effect others and the planet, while simultaneously not thinking they're good enough to be representatives of Society via Government.

I'm not saying you're wrong, I'm saying that EVERY WAY FORWARD, is flawed.

If you don't believe that humans will grow to realize what is best for them is also best for the environment, your only other choice is to enslave them for stupidity.

 

[Oddball]

Did he call it, or what?

After having thus successively taken each member of the community in its powerful grasp and fashioned him at will, the government then extends its arm over the whole community. It covers the surface of society with a network of small, complicated rules, minute and uniform, through which the most original minds and the most energetic characters cannot penetrate, to rise above the crowd. The will of man is not shattered, but softened, bent, and guided; men are seldom forced by it to act, but they are constantly restrained from acting. Such a power does not destroy, but it prevents existence: it does not tyrannize, but it compresses, enervates, extinguishes, and stupefies a people, till each nation is reduced to nothing better than a flock of timid and industrious animals, of which the government is the shepherd.

Alexis de Tocqueville - Democracy in America, Volume II (1840); Book Four, Chapter VI

You're an idiot to assume the paragraph is necessarily true simply because you see people agreeing with Government acts.....but then..........you'd have to totally ignore every time that they disagree which blows the tripe pretty clean out of the water.

There's this other stuff in life for thinking people: it's called gray area.

Musta hit ya pretty close to the mark, to get ya all riled up like that.