I've just got in from work who
- Thread starter scartiger
- Start date
FFS, I have to know 35 to 40 people dying in mysterious ways in order refute your own burden of proof?
TRUMP WHOOPED DAT ASS!!!!!
WE WILL ACTUALLY HAVE A REAL PRESIDENT AGAIN!!!!!
MADE IN THE USA!!!!!!
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!!!!
NOW, SOMEBODY HIT ME WITH A TRUMP 'DEAL WITH IT' GIF CAUSE I'M ON MY PHONE LOL
WE WILL ACTUALLY HAVE A REAL PRESIDENT AGAIN!!!!!
MADE IN THE USA!!!!!!
MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!!!!
NOW, SOMEBODY HIT ME WITH A TRUMP 'DEAL WITH IT' GIF CAUSE I'M ON MY PHONE LOL
I thought he was going to eliminate lobbyists. Instead, he promoted them directly to the cabinet. Goldman Sachs (which we were all critical of Hillary for, btw, and would have hung if she made this pick) and Rex Tillerson, CEO of exon mobile?? These aren't conservative or progressive picks.
Some of them are good choices. Others....its like he's just fvcking with us. Like the crazy Doctor guy - you would think maybe Surgeon General, but no....its housing. Then you put an crony of the fossil fuel industry in charge of the EPA. The WWF lady. And Rick Perry? El oh el.....
But hey - he won so he gets to do what he wants. When does that swamp get drained?
Let's pretend for a moment that Russia hacked the DNC and revealed their agenda. Then people said their agenda is bad... WTF is wrong with your brains?
I don't know.... I wanted Guiliani for Secretary of State. He has some good picks. Let's just see how it plays out.
I would have thought Ben Carson would have been Surgeon General too. I really like him. Why do you say he's crazy? Got to wait and see. Give Trump a chance.
have you read their resumes?
carson grew up in the projects. better to have a man to help manage housing that didnt grow up with a silver spoon in their mouth.
tillerson knows just about every world leader and knows how to do trade deals and how to navigate most countries red tape to get trade deals thru. yes thru energy but now will dedicate the sec of state position to more trade focus than a war focus.
but if you have vetted both and still feel that way then thats fine.
Last edited:
@ladedade
hey i was pissed about the goldman and exxon guys
but after i studied their resumes and whats trumps trade goals are,
im ok with both. what trump wants to do with trade, which is increase us output abroad, having someone with all those trade contacts is an asset.
my favorite rule that trump has implemented is no way you can serve in the executive branch and be attached to special interest groups.
newt and rudy would not change their approach, so trump didnt pick them
hey i was pissed about the goldman and exxon guys
but after i studied their resumes and whats trumps trade goals are,
im ok with both. what trump wants to do with trade, which is increase us output abroad, having someone with all those trade contacts is an asset.
my favorite rule that trump has implemented is no way you can serve in the executive branch and be attached to special interest groups.
newt and rudy would not change their approach, so trump didnt pick them
Didn't have a problem with those guys - actually think they could do well and agree with your thoughts on Newt and Rudy - those two are opportunists looking out for themselves.
which cabinet members you think dont match job description?
one thing i found out this morning per fox is that his cabinet is more diverse than
1- new york times
2- clinton foundation
3-dnc elected officials staff
not a fan of perry, and havent really looked at epa. some cabinet positions i dont really thinks thats important. maybe i should care more.
epa notes
If confirmed as the next head of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt has said he will fight three of President Obama’s most important environmental initiatives:
1-methane regulations,
2- the Clean Power Plan and
3- United States participation in the Paris climate agreement.
Pruitt, Trump’s EPA pick, has both sides of climate divide girding for a major fight
Two years ago, at an event convened by the conservative Federalist Society, Oklahoma Attorney General Scott Pruitt joked about a competition of sorts he had going with the Texas attorney general over the Environmental Protection Agency.
“When I came into office, I think he had roughly 13 lawsuits against the EPA,” Pruitt told the audience. “I’m trying to catch up — we only have, I think, six or seven.”
Pruitt indeed spent much of his tenure as state attorney general attacking the federal agency he now is nominated to head, going so far as to describe himself as “a leading advocate against the EPA’s activist agenda.” Along the way, he spearheaded a coalition of state attorneys general in their legal challenge to EPA’s Clean Power Plan, Obama’s key policy aimed at reducing U.S. greenhouse gas emissions from the electricity sector. He also sued over the EPA’s attempts to curtail the emissions of methane, a powerful greenhouse gas, from the oil and gas sector.
But should the 48-year-old lawyer end up at the helm of the EPA, he is likely to find himself on the receiving end of a cascade of litigation from environmental and public health groups intent on protecting Obama-era antipollution measures and ensuring that the agency lives up to its mission of safeguarding the air Americans breathe and the water they drink.
“We definitely plan to fight any rollback or any attacks on our bedrock environmental laws. We think that the courts will be the last line of defense if advocacy doesn’t work,” said Lisa Garcia, vice president of litigation for Earthjustice, which employs more than 100 lawyers across the country.
Though President-elect Donald Trump and Pruitt are intent on pulling back the EPA’s authority and putting more power in the hands of states, Garcia noted that key environmental laws such as the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act were passed with bipartisan support and require the agency to enforce violations that put Americans at risk.
“We’re ready to make sure these laws are adhered to and that the EPA follows its obligations and its mission,” she said. “We’re ready for that fight.”
[Trump names Scott Pruitt, Oklahoma attorney general suing EPA on climate change, to head the EPA]
Pruitt himself seems prepared for just such a fight.
“The greatest opportunity that we have heading into this new administration…is to provide certainty to business industries across this country,” he said in an interview last month with radio host John Catsimatidis. “When you look at the EPA, and the role that it’s played over the last several years, there’s going to be substantial change in that agency. There’s going to be a regulatory rollback.”
When it comes to reversing the Obama administration’s environmental policies and substantially altering the EPA’s reach, Pruitt “can do a fair amount,” said Tom McGarity, a law professor at the University of Texas at Austin who focuses on environmental and regulatory law. “He will be moving against institutional inertia, no question about that, but the civil servants in EPA are going to try to do what the boss tells them to do.”
A key factor will be whether Pruitt appoints high-level staff who know the agency well and are able to get his mandates carried out. But, McGarity added, he will be less successful if he fails to change the institution from within and merely attacks it — as he has done during his tenure in Oklahoma. A case in point: Ronald Reagan’s controversial EPA administrator during his first term.
“The last time we had somebody who really came in with a mandate to turn things around was . . . Anne Gorsuch, and she really wasn’t able to do it because she was fairly arrogant about it,” McGarity said. “She made some very bad appointments and, ultimately, wound up in a lot of scandal.”
David Doniger, a lawyer at the Natural Resources Defense Council, said that while Pruitt’s appointment puts the environmental community very much on the defensive, the detailed nature of the process that the EPA must follow to create new regulations, or reverse existing ones, makes it difficult to roll back much of what the Obama administration has done. It also provides opportunities for green groups to resist in the courts.
“We are going to be vigilant about making sure that every step in the administrative process is respected, and if they try to shortcut things — by suspending regulations, suspending public health safeguards without due process — we will take them to court right away,” Doniger said.
Before Pruitt can set about the work of scaling back both the EPA and Obama environmental regulations that he has called harmful to U.S. businesses, he first has to get through the Senate confirmation process. While the Republican majority probably will assure his confirmation, he’s certain to face criticism and harsh questioning from Democratic lawmakers, who have denounced him as a mouthpiece of the fossil fuel industry and yet another potential Trump Cabinet member who has questioned the scientific consensus around climate change.
[EPA chief: Trump can’t halt U.S. shift to clean energy]
“This is a full-fledged environmental emergency,” Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) said on a call with reporters Thursday. Schatz pledged a pitched confirmation fight and promised that colleagues who support Pruitt will have to explain themselves when it comes to the science of climate change. “This is going to be a litmus test for every member of the Senate who claims not to be a denier.”
Energy and Environment newsletter
The science and policy of environmental issues.
Of course, those who share Pruitt’s long-held views about federal government overreach have welcomed his appointment.
Sen. James M. Inhofe, the Oklahoma Republican who has long cast doubt on climate-change science, wrote on Facebook that Pruitt “has demonstrated that he is an expert on environmental laws and a champion of states’ roles in implementing those laws.” Greg Abbott, former Texas attorney general and now the governor, tweeted that “Pruitt is excellent choice for EPA. He & I teamed up on many lawsuits against the EPA. He’ll bring needed change.”
On that spring day in 2014, Pruitt himself made no secret of his disdain for the EPA’s approach to regulation.
“This dictatorial attitude, that says so long as you agree with us then everything is kosher and everything is okay, is exactly the opposite of what Congress has said repeatedly [is] the role of the states,” he said. “The states have a meaningful role. It’s not an administrative role. The states are not a vessel to carry out the desires of EPA. The states are actually there to make important decisions, balancing factors between industry and consumers and meeting the obligations of air and water quality in their respective states.”
Yes there is a big difference. I am a center left person and that usually makes me an enemy to all sides. @SpillerTime
Exactly. States rights in regards to environmental regulations remind me of when they used to allow smoking on airplanes.
yea thats a tough one.
should the airline decide using supply demand theory on smoking
or should the federal govt intrude on a business model
back in college bartending- i absolutely hated allowing smoking at the bar.
and from personal experience running the lobster distribution, dealing with the epa, fda, dhs, and how ever many feddies came walking thru the door to be asses and slowing us down.
i remember the feddies going thru my books and looked me dead i. the eye and was like,
"hey- these terrorist could put plastic explosives in a lobster.
i died laughing, behind his back after he left.
i could not make a list of how many local, state, and federal agencies interfered with business.
i was amazed at how many people i had to pay off to get lobster to boston or new york for flights out.
the ice caps, for one.
but congrats on your victory. hope it works out, though nothing that's happened so far leads to believe it will be anything other than an unmitigated disaster.
i thought the earth's climate was in a constant state of change?
some places get warmer, some places get colder
and when the poles flip, doubt we can do anything about it but just enjoy the ride
