US supreme court is now betraying humanity

Page 1 of 4 [ 52 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Tollorin
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Jun 2009
Age: 39
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,178
Location: Sherbrooke, Québec, Canada

09 Feb 2016, 9:11 pm

First the decision allowing the super PAC, and now, much worse, this. :(
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/02/09/supreme_court_deals_blow_to_obama_plan_to_curb_carbon_emissions_from_coal.html
May the name of the judges having voted for that decision be forever cursed along with those of the Koch brothers... May they be cursed for eternity, as a remainder of how greed and fanaticism can blind peoples and bring them to condemn the life of millions of peoples and bring misery to hundred of millions. Really F*** THEM ! !! :evil:



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

09 Feb 2016, 10:14 pm

Quote:
The 5-to-4 vote, along partisan lines, means that the Environmental Protection Agency regulations, part of a transformative plan to shift the American power grid to cleaner sources.”

They would complain even more about nuclear power plants that replace the coal burning power plants.

Quote:
“The states challenging the regulation, led mostly by Republicans.”

The republicans being the ones that are trying to save jobs.
Imagine that. 8O

Quote:
Eighteen states, mostly led by Democrats, opposed the request for a stay.

Just like the democrats to sell the working man down the river while pretending to be in his corner.
Nothing new here. :roll:

Kudos for the Supreme Court.
If this is "betraying humanity" then keep up the good work! :hail:


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


GGPViper
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 23 Sep 2009
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,589

10 Feb 2016, 5:30 am

Tollorin wrote:
First the decision allowing the super PAC, and now, much worse, this. :(
http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2016/02/09/supreme_court_deals_blow_to_obama_plan_to_curb_carbon_emissions_from_coal.html
May the name of the judges having voted for that decision be forever cursed along with those of the Koch brothers... May they be cursed for eternity, as a remainder of how greed and fanaticism can blind peoples and bring them to condemn the life of millions of peoples and bring misery to hundred of millions. Really F*** THEM ! ! ! :evil:

This is not equivalent to Citizens United.

SCOTUS granted an application for stay "pending disposition of the applicants’ petitions for review in the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit and disposition of the applicants’ petition for a writ of certiorari, if such writ is sought."

Source: http://www.supremecourt.gov/orders/cour ... r_21p3.pdf

They didn't overturn Obama's carbon plan.

Also note that SCOTUS has previously ruled (in a 6-3 ruling) that the EPA not only has a right, but an obligation to regulate carbon dioxide emissions.

In Massachussets et al. v. Environmental Protection Agency et al. (2007) the Supreme Court ruled that:

SCOTUS wrote:
The harms associated with climate change are serious and well recognized. The Government’s own objective assessment of the relevant science and a strong consensus among qualified experts in-dicate that global warming threatens, inter alia, a precipitate rise in sea levels, severe and irreversible changes to natural ecosystems, a significant reduction in winter snowpack with direct and important economic consequences, and increases in the spread of disease and the ferocity of weather events. That these changes are widely shared does not minimize Massachusetts’ interest in the outcome of this litigation.

Source: http://www.supremecourt.gov/opinions/06pdf/05-1120.pdf

If the Supreme Court ruled in favor of carbon regulation back when the EPA was fighting against regulation under the Bush presidency, then it is highly likely that the court will eventually rule in favor of Obama's new carbon regulation.


_________________
Omit needless words.


cberg
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Dec 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 11,732
Location: A swiftly tilting planet

10 Feb 2016, 5:44 am

Ok so burning coal is pointless & so is obeying ones' government. I hope that covers everything on a need-to-know basis here...


_________________
"Standing on a well-chilled cinder, we see the fading of the suns, and try to recall the vanished brilliance of the origin of the worlds."
-Georges Lemaitre
"I fly through hyperspace, in my green computer interface"
-Gem Tos :mrgreen:


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 42,013
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

11 Feb 2016, 1:50 am

Raptor wrote:
Quote:
The 5-to-4 vote, along partisan lines, means that the Environmental Protection Agency regulations, part of a transformative plan to shift the American power grid to cleaner sources.”

They would complain even more about nuclear power plants that replace the coal burning power plants.

Quote:
“The states challenging the regulation, led mostly by Republicans.”

The republicans being the ones that are trying to save jobs.
Imagine that. 8O

Quote:
Eighteen states, mostly led by Democrats, opposed the request for a stay.

Just like the democrats to sell the working man down the river while pretending to be in his corner.
Nothing new here. :roll:

Kudos for the Supreme Court.
If this is "betraying humanity" then keep up the good work! :hail:


I, for one, would like to see nuclear (that's nucalar, in Republican speak) replace coal. Hire the coal workers to work in the cooling towers, and waste disposal, and any other aspect of that industry.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,671
Location: Seattle

11 Feb 2016, 2:17 am

A left wing foreigner radically misunderstands a US court decision and comically overreacts? Unpossible!


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


looniverse
Sea Gull
Sea Gull

Joined: 19 Oct 2015
Age: 42
Posts: 233
Location: Saint Paul

11 Feb 2016, 8:40 am

What flavor, excuse me, flavour kool-ade did you get?

You sure got a lot of hubris to think that in the conflict of humans vs. nature that humans can actually win.



Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 42,013
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

11 Feb 2016, 11:32 am

looniverse wrote:
What flavor, excuse me, flavour kool-ade did you get?

You sure got a lot of hubris to think that in the conflict of humans vs. nature that humans can actually win.


It seems to me that humans have a pretty good record of f*cking up nature. Even if you don't believe in global warming, just look at how whole mountain tops are obliterated by the coal industry. Or how whole species of animals have vanished. And deforestation is a human activity that has been going on for at least ten thousand years, as much of the Middle East and North Africa in prehistoric times had been lush forest land, till farmland hungry humans cleared the land with slash-and-burn methods, leaving a wasteland behind them as they moved on.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


cathylynn
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Aug 2011
Gender: Female
Posts: 12,220
Location: northeast US

11 Feb 2016, 11:41 am

it's not about saving jobs. green energy creates jobs - 200,000 jobs at last count. it's about dirty fuel company profits.



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

11 Feb 2016, 12:05 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Quote:
The 5-to-4 vote, along partisan lines, means that the Environmental Protection Agency regulations, part of a transformative plan to shift the American power grid to cleaner sources.”

They would complain even more about nuclear power plants that replace the coal burning power plants.

Quote:
“The states challenging the regulation, led mostly by Republicans.”

The republicans being the ones that are trying to save jobs.
Imagine that. 8O

Quote:
Eighteen states, mostly led by Democrats, opposed the request for a stay.

Just like the democrats to sell the working man down the river while pretending to be in his corner.
Nothing new here. :roll:

Kudos for the Supreme Court.
If this is "betraying humanity" then keep up the good work! :hail:


I, for one, would like to see nuclear (that's nucalar, in Republican speak) replace coal. Hire the coal workers to work in the cooling towers, and waste disposal, and any other aspect of that industry.

"nucalar", huh?
The $1000 question: Would YOU take a job in one?
Just how many people does it take to staff just the cooling tower, anyway?
Besides, I thought you liberals were terrified of anything nuclear.

Image


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 42,013
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

11 Feb 2016, 5:29 pm

Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Raptor wrote:
Quote:
The 5-to-4 vote, along partisan lines, means that the Environmental Protection Agency regulations, part of a transformative plan to shift the American power grid to cleaner sources.”

They would complain even more about nuclear power plants that replace the coal burning power plants.

Quote:
“The states challenging the regulation, led mostly by Republicans.”

The republicans being the ones that are trying to save jobs.
Imagine that. 8O

Quote:
Eighteen states, mostly led by Democrats, opposed the request for a stay.

Just like the democrats to sell the working man down the river while pretending to be in his corner.
Nothing new here. :roll:

Kudos for the Supreme Court.
If this is "betraying humanity" then keep up the good work! :hail:


I, for one, would like to see nuclear (that's nucalar, in Republican speak) replace coal. Hire the coal workers to work in the cooling towers, and waste disposal, and any other aspect of that industry.

"nucalar", huh?
The $1000 question: Would YOU take a job in one?
Just how many people does it take to staff just the cooling tower, anyway?
Besides, I thought you liberals were terrified of anything nuclear.

Image


Would I take a job in a nuclear plant? Why not?
How many people does it take to run a cooling tower? Beats me. But there are other jobs in need of filling in the nuclear power industry.
And no, liberals aren't all afraid of nuclear power - that's one of those myths the right told about the left, then started believing it was true.
And yes, nucalar. George W. used to mispronounce nuclear as nuclalar all the time. Same as he once claimed America's enemies were "disassembling," after which he added, "That means not telling the truth."
No Mr. President, it means that they are taking something apart. :P


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

11 Feb 2016, 7:43 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
Would I take a job in a nuclear plant? Why not?

That would be a surprise. :roll:

Quote:
How many people does it take to run a cooling tower? Beats me. But there are other jobs in need of filling in the nuclear power industry.

I wasn’t asking a question. You seemed to think that cooling towers alone require enough staffing to absorb all the displaced coal miners. Just what do you think the purpose of a cooling tower alone is, anyway?

Quote:
And no, liberals aren't all afraid of nuclear power - that's one of those myths the right told about the left, then started believing it was true.

The left has a track record of protesting nuclear power that goes back decades.



Quote:
And yes, nucalar. George W. used to mispronounce nuclear as nuclalar all the time. Same as he once claimed America's enemies were "disassembling," after which he added, "That means not telling the truth."
No Mr. President, it means that they are taking something apart. :P

Just like a liberal to listen to any speech republicans make just to have something to be upset over. I bet I could fit every word Obama has spoken that I’ve listened over the past seven to into fifteen minutes.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 42,013
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

11 Feb 2016, 8:00 pm

Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
Would I take a job in a nuclear plant? Why not?

That would be a surprise. :roll:

Quote:
How many people does it take to run a cooling tower? Beats me. But there are other jobs in need of filling in the nuclear power industry.

I wasn’t asking a question. You seemed to think that cooling towers alone require enough staffing to absorb all the displaced coal miners. Just what do you think the purpose of a cooling tower alone is, anyway?

Quote:
And no, liberals aren't all afraid of nuclear power - that's one of those myths the right told about the left, then started believing it was true.

The left has a track record of protesting nuclear power that goes back decades.



Quote:
And yes, nucalar. George W. used to mispronounce nuclear as nuclalar all the time. Same as he once claimed America's enemies were "disassembling," after which he added, "That means not telling the truth."
No Mr. President, it means that they are taking something apart. :P

Just like a liberal to listen to any speech republicans make just to have something to be upset over. I bet I could fit every word Obama has spoken that I’ve listened over the past seven to into fifteen minutes.


And why would it surprise you if I took a job in a nuclear plant?
As I've said before, there are plenty more jobs connected to the nuclear power industry than just working in the cooling tower. Then there are those businesses that would spring up either to support the nuclear industry, or that provide services to the workers, which could absorb more ex coal workers.
Sure, some liberals oppose nuclear power, but not all do. Do all conservatives oppose LGBT rights? Of course not, but in both cases, it's the nutbars that give the rest a bad name.
And no, as a liberal, I don't recall everything Bush had said; only what I can make fun of him with. :P


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

11 Feb 2016, 8:51 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
And why would it surprise you if I took a job in a nuclear plant?

I’d love to elaborate but it would be butthurt inducing to you. I only allow myself to earn one TOS a week and I’ve already gotten it for this week so no dice.

Quote:
As I've said before, there are plenty more jobs connected to the nuclear power industry than just working in the cooling tower. Then there are those businesses that would spring up either to support the nuclear industry, or that provide services to the workers, which could absorb more ex coal workers.

No, it was you that said cooling towers, not me. You should have just said nuclear power plants then it would at least look like you know what you’re talking about. It’s too late to turn back now.

Quote:
Sure, some liberals oppose nuclear power, but not all do. Do all conservatives oppose LGBT rights? Of course not, but in both cases, it's the nutbars that give the rest a bad name.
I’ll come back and find this next time you make one of your sweeping generalizations about non-progressives. The fact is that the enemies of nuclear power have traditionally been liberal peaceniks and tree huggers.

Quote:
And no, as a liberal, I don't recall everything Bush had said; only what I can make fun of him with. :P
Not just Bush but any non-progressive with a voice. How many times have we had long trollish threads posted by a liberal about what some republican politician, candidate, or conservative talk show host or columnist has said?


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 42,013
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

11 Feb 2016, 9:14 pm

Raptor wrote:
Kraichgauer wrote:
And why would it surprise you if I took a job in a nuclear plant?

I’d love to elaborate but it would be butthurt inducing to you. I only allow myself to earn one TOS a week and I’ve already gotten it for this week so no dice.

Quote:
As I've said before, there are plenty more jobs connected to the nuclear power industry than just working in the cooling tower. Then there are those businesses that would spring up either to support the nuclear industry, or that provide services to the workers, which could absorb more ex coal workers.

No, it was you that said cooling towers, not me. You should have just said nuclear power plants then it would at least look like you know what you’re talking about. It’s too late to turn back now.

Quote:
Sure, some liberals oppose nuclear power, but not all do. Do all conservatives oppose LGBT rights? Of course not, but in both cases, it's the nutbars that give the rest a bad name.
I’ll come back and find this next time you make one of your sweeping generalizations about non-progressives. The fact is that the enemies of nuclear power have traditionally been liberal peaceniks and tree huggers.

Quote:
And no, as a liberal, I don't recall everything Bush had said; only what I can make fun of him with. :P
Not just Bush but any non-progressive with a voice. How many times have we had long trollish threads posted by a liberal about what some republican politician, candidate, or conservative talk show host or columnist has said?


You don't think I've ever held down jobs? I've done everything from working in the food industry at the Commons Of Gonzage at Gonzaga University, to working in a sheet metal shop.
In one of my responses to you, I clearly stated "nuclear industry." But so what, I'm saying it now.
My dad, who was an old style, union household Democrat, had been a proponent of nuclear power, so I sincerely doubt he and I are the only ones. So what if some loons on the left are against nuclear power; as I said, do you think all conservatives should be associated with raging idiots like Focus On The Family in regard to LGBT rights?
As for your last point: so? I will ridicule and criticize who I ridicule and criticize.


_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

11 Feb 2016, 9:47 pm

Kraichgauer wrote:
You don't think I've ever held down jobs? I've done everything from working in the food industry at the Commons Of Gonzage at Gonzaga University, to working in a sheet metal shop.

And how long ago was the last one?

Quote:
My dad, who was an old style, union household Democrat, had been a proponent of nuclear power, so I sincerely doubt he and I are the only ones. So what if some loons on the left are against nuclear power; as I said, do you think all conservatives should be associated with raging idiots like Focus On The Family in regard to LGBT rights?

Yeah, right; it's always been conservatives that have protested nuclear power.
What was I thinking? :roll: :roll:

Quote:
As for your last point: so? I will ridicule and criticize who I ridicule and criticize.

It's called obsessing. :shameonyou:


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley