US Politics #2

[alguien]

And some time has passed, which I think makes those issues less costly for him. People forget about this stuff. Or stop caring. Sort of like what happened with bidens plagiarism. It never got any traction as a negative issue because people didn't really care anymore.

It will be interesting to see how it plays out.

Perhaps. Though you can be sure if he seriously ran, it would be brought up again.

I can't see social conservatives being enthusiastic about him, but I can see economic/politico-minded cons liking him.

I don't think women in general would view him as favorably. Biden may have plagiarized, but (insert anecdotal evidence here) my mom and a lot of other middle-aged women I know loved him. What happened with him becoming a widower and raising his sons may have very-much helped Obama. If Biden ran against Ginrich, I'd give it to Biden no contest. He may make stupid gaffes, but there likeable stupid gaffes.

In any event, I agree that it will be very interesting to see how Newt affects the next race.

[alguien]

Tormund,

A rant worthy of EHK.

Seconded. Well done, Tormund.

[sToNED_CAT]

You're absolutely right. We should wait until the Southwest and Midwest turn into desert and water has become scarce (except for the coasts, which are being flooded due to the melting ice caps). Once we realize the gravity of the situation, we'll be able to do something about it immediately...

Stop talking as if global warming was purely negative thing. Surely for some people it might suck, but generally warmer climate would be much better for humanity.

And honestly cap and trade would have done absolutely nothing to global warming. Dirty industry would not dissapear it would just move to China, India or other countries with lax enviromental standarts.

[TrueMetis]

Stop talking as if global warming was purely negative thing. Surely for some people it might suck, but generally warmer climate would be much better for humanity.

And honestly cap and trade would have done absolutely nothing to global warming. Dirty industry would not dissapear it would just move to China, India or other countries with lax enviromental standarts.

If by some people you mean everyone in the tropics, then ya it would suck. Generally warmer climates will suck for humanity because a lot of farmland will be lost and we won't regain as much because land further north sucks for crops.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Ser Rep.,

You're absolutely right. We should wait until the Southwest and Midwest turn into desert and water has become scarce (except for the coasts, which are being flooded due to the melting ice caps). Once we realize the gravity of the situation, we'll be able to do something about it immediately...

:stillsick:

Just an FYI, when we made the Louisiana purchase the great plains were referred to as the "Great American Desert". Further the U.S. Southwest is already a desert and has been for some time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_American_Desert

[GrimTuesday]

Been lurking on this thread for a few days now but I think that I shall come out of the shadows and state my opinions on some of these issues.

First is the issue of the mosque being built next to Ground Zero. I say let them build it, because if we don't then what happens. Suddenly Bin-Laden has another tape out talking about how the west is oppressing all Muslims and thus we just radicalized a hundred or so people who otherwise may have sat on the fence and watched. Also I think that this has exposed the xenophobic side of many people in this country, they fear that Muslims will somehow take over our country if one mosque which as the people funding it have said it is more of a community center to teach tolerance for all people. I find some of the remarks about Muslims repugnant and outright cruel. I have a few very good friends who are Muslim and they all say that the people who are blowing themselves up and killing people are wrong, that they are not representing the true nature of Islam.

Next Sarah Palin running for president. :lmao: She is what really sunk the McCain campaign by alienating the moderates in the party and getting the crazies out en mass. I don't think that she would win if she got a brain implant that allowed her to know everything about Russia and the fact that you can’t see it from her back porch.

Next is climate change which I believe is real. I do not however see how cap and trade will really remedy this problem. What we need to do is really start funding research for alternative power options because oil is quickly running out and it is potential very dangerous to drill for. (I'm looking at you BP)Not to mention the fact that this would create many more employment opportunities seeing how we need qualified individuals to help us research and build the wind turbines, the damns, and the geothermal power stations that I believe should bring the world into a bright new future. If we were to really invest in finding new clean ways to power our cities then we wouldn't have to destroy many of the natural beauty that our world has in the landscape and the wildlife of this planet we call home.

[Annelise]

If we were to really invest in finding new clean ways to power our cities then we wouldn't have to destroy many of the natural beauty that our world has in the landscape and the wildlife of this planet we call home.

On a local note:

On Thursday, July 15th, Compact Power, Inc. will officially break ground on a new advanced battery manufacturing factory in Holland, Michigan. The plant is the ninth of nine new advanced battery factories to start construction as a result of the $2.4 billion in Recovery Act advanced battery and electric vehicle awards President Obama announced last August. Before the Recovery Act, there were no domestic factories doing high-volume manufacturing of batteries for electric vehicles, but due to Recovery Act investments like this one, the U.S. will have the capacity to produce up to 40 percent of the world’s batteries by 2015.

The $151 million Recovery Act grant awarded to Compact Power last August has been matched dollar-for-dollar by the company. As a result of this public-private partnership, this project will support hundreds of jobs in Holland, Michigan. By the day of groundbreaking, Compact Power, Inc. a subsidiary of LG Chem Ltd., estimates it will have already created or saved about 70 construction jobs – and is on-track for 200 by September 2010 and 300 at the peak of construction. Once the facility reaches full scale operation in 2013, the company says it will then employ 300 Michigan workers, including operators, engineers, and administrative staff, in permanent positions at the site.

When fully operational in 2013, the Compact Power, Inc. factory will produce battery cells to support 53,000 Chevy Volts a year. GM’s Volt is one of the first plug-in hybrid vehicles in the world, and can travel roughly 40 miles on domestic electricity before a gasoline engine kicks in. The Chevy Volt will hit showrooms around the nation at the end of this year. Also, Ford announced yesterday that batteries for its new electric Focus will also be supplied by Compact Power’s Holland, Michigan plant once it is operational.

[Ser Reptitious]

Anguy,

Stop talking as if global warming was purely negative thing. Surely for some people it might suck, but generally warmer climate would be much better for humanity.

Some people/regions may benefit, but overall the negatives are bound to far outweigh the positives (rising sea levels, reduced availability of fresh water, spreading of deserts, etc.). Being able to cultivate a bit more land further north than currently possible is not going to off-set those.

And honestly cap and trade would have done absolutely nothing to global warming. Dirty industry would not dissapear it would just move to China, India or other countries with lax enviromental standarts.

All systems have their flaws. I'm certainly open to other options, as long as something is done, since doing nothing is pretty much the worst approach of all.

Scot,

Just an FYI, when we made the Louisiana purchase the great plains were referred to as the "Great American Desert". Further the U.S. Southwest is already a desert and has been for some time.

http://en.wikipedia....American_Desert

But that is actually exactly my point: The great plains were considered 'desert' in the 19th century because people thought agriculture was impossible there. But with modern irrigation methods this has turned out to be wrong. However, if global warming becomes a reality, this area may very well turn into a real desert and agriculture will no longer be possible.

As for the southwest, yes it is already quite desert-y, but global warming may well make living there virtually impossible.

[Slick Mongoose]

Global warming has the potential to do the following:

Or, at the upper limit of potential global warming, making most of the planet uninhabitable. Not very likely, but you'd think it would dominate the risk analysis.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

IT ALREADY IS A FEW BLOCKS AWAY.

Are you saying the site in question isn't relevant to 9/11? If so, the people who want to build it disagree with you, because they say the location is significant.

Anyway, the building in question was damaged by part of a plane's fuselage on 9/11. To me, that makes it part of the site.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Ser Rep.,

The Ogallala aquifer is what makes agraculture possible on the High Plains. We've been draining it for the better part of a century. How long do you think it will last with normal rainfall?

[Ser Reptitious]

Scot,

The Ogallala aquifer is what makes agraculture possible on the High Plains. We've been draining it for the better part of a century. How long do you think it will last with normal rainfall?

Fair point. But would you agree that if anything global warming will only speed up the process?

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Ser Rep.,

We do not know yet. How weather patterns will settle is unclear.

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

Global warming has the potential to do the following:

-create massive drought and crop failure forcing mass-migration and war

-create environments in which people are more likely to turn to extremism/terrorism due to hardship

-create human conflicts over resources that are growing more scarce

-cause mass-extinction in the oceans due to increased acid levels, which directly messes with the food supply and throws the the ecosystem

-increase the threat of skin cancer

-force massive immigration trends towards major cities, but more as refugees than simply immigrants

That's just a short list. There's plenty more. The potential to take many of the traditional causes of human suffering and conflict (war, starvation, land, scarce resources) and make them worse.

So you're saying those things won't happen if the cap and trade bill passes?

[Shryke]

Ser Rep.,

The Ogallala aquifer is what makes agraculture possible on the High Plains. We've been draining it for the better part of a century. How long do you think it will last with normal rainfall?

Sorry Scot, no time to answer that question. Not in this economy!

[Former Lord of Winterfell]

You seem to argue that there is only a symbolic impact if the mosque is built where it is currently proposed. No harm (symbolically) if it is moved a few blocks.

Quite right.

Sorry, but you couldn't be more wrong. You talk about a trophy victory for the radicals. Well, guess what? Creating what basically amounts to a Muslim-free zone (worship-wise) around the WTC site will signal to all Muslims that America feels that Islam in general is somehow connected to 9/11 and therefore cannot be trusted.

If you are correct that moving this a few blocks will radicalize all these moderate moslems, then I suggest that they're not quite as peace loving as you assume. "You moved our the building site two blocks. Die, infidels!"

But I don't think you are correct. I think you're judging this from am extreme western liberalism perspective, where moving a site a couple of blocks is cause to law down in front of bulldozers.

The degree of religious freedom in the U.S. Is far beyond anything in the moslem world. Moving a mosque two blocks wouldn't even appear on their "religious freedom" radar screens.

On the other hand, putting up a trophy at the site of a martyrdom just might. The symolism is different in kind, which is why assuming equivalent impact from moving/not moving is flawed.

[The Iceman of the North]

On this I agree with FLOW. The US would be much better off if there were a total ban on new religious buildings near either the residence of people not subscribing to that particular religion, or sites that for some reason are important to people not subscribing to that particular religion. After all, why should these religions be allowed to continue antagonising other people? The decommissioning of religious buildings already in place with similar violations is preferable, but might not be practical.

[peterbound]

But I don't think you are correct. I think you're judging this from am extreme western liberalism perspective, where moving a site a couple of blocks is cause to law down in front of bulldozers.

The degree of religious freedom in the U.S. Is far beyond anything in the moslem world. Moving a mosque two blocks wouldn't even appear on their "religious freedom" radar screens.

On the other hand, putting up a trophy at the site of a martyrdom just might. The symolism is different in kind, which is why assuming equivalent impact from moving/not moving is flawed.

It is interesting that most folks on here look at this in a very western light. To them, as a liberal, they view this in the sense of enlightenment and acceptance. Most of the Moslem world views this in a much much different light. To them this is something very different.

When western developers start building churches in Iraq and Afghanistan or a Christian Learning Center near the boarder of Mecca (or even on the outskirts of the area non moslem's are allowed to enter) and we hear no backlash from the Moslem world could we say that they are open for discourse and understanding. This of course will never happen (although the churches might get built but nothing is going down in or around Mecca), and even if it did there is no chance in hell that there would be any less uproar within the Islamic world.

As i stated before, people that cared should have bought the land beforehand and built something they thought was acceptable. But they didn't. This move on the Islamic worlds part does smak of unneeded instigation on a sensitive issue

[jack-be-lucky]

On this I agree with FLOW. The US would be much better off if there were a total ban on new religious buildings near either the residence of people not subscribing to that particular religion, or sites that for some reason are important to people not subscribing to that particular religion. After all, why should these religions be allowed to continue antagonising other people? The decommissioning of religious buildings already in place with similar violations is preferable, but might not be practical.

Anyone who's had the pleasure of living next a to catholic church would probably agree, since the catholics insist on continuing that archaic tradition of ringing the bells to call the flock at every mass.

Our own mosque controversy was partly settled when the builders agreed to not have any amplified loudspeakers on the property. And the first thing I thought was the question of bells. Could they have big giant bells that wake up the whole neighborhood?

[Ser Reptitious]

FLOW,

If you are correct that moving this a few blocks will radicalize all these moderate moslems, then I suggest that they're not quite as peace loving as you assume. "You moved our the building site two blocks. Die, infidels!"

What??? Where did I ever suggest that moving the mosque a few blocks would radicalize moderate Muslims?

All I said is that insisting on such a move symbolically demonstrates that the West/America to some degree associates Islam in general with 9/11. Since the fundamentalists want to be seen as representing all (pure) Muslims, this would play right into their hands!