One of those “stopped clock” moments when I agree with Trump. But also recognize that the Oval Office shouldn’t be trying to interfere with the normal business of federal agencies.
This is genuinely optimistic.
Wow, that would be awesome. A tough road, and maybe too late but still.
Thanks for linking that.
Good. It is one of the great absurdities of our time that the idea of preserving a habitable planet has been bundled into the left/right ideological divide.
Newt Gingrich used to be pro-environment, in fact a lot of Republicans once were. Here’s a Vox article (sorry) with a brief history on how it started to change:
The other strand of early anti-environmentalism ran through the South, where traditional Democratic dominance was in flux. Democrats like then-Georgia governor Jimmy Carter embraced environmental causes. Some Republicans did as well. When college professor Newt Gingrich ran for Congress starting in 1972 in a West Georgia district extending into Atlanta’s suburbs, it made sense that he did so both as a Republican and an environmentalist.
But Gingrich kept losing until he noticed that rural lifelong Democrats rejecting his candidacy turned out repeatedly for a John Bircher Democrat running in a neighboring district who publicly questioned the constitutionality of both the EPA and national parks. Taking the cue, Gingrich won his first of many Congressional races in 1978 by dialing down his environmental rhetoric and cozying up to local industries that had run afoul of the new agencies and laws.
There is no conservative reason to oppose sensible environmentalism. There are plenty of reasons to oppose idiot environmentalists who have nonsense junk science… but the problem is that the GOP has decided to paint all environmental causes as though they were junk science.
I mean, it’s science, which is their sworn enemy.
The lead-crime hypothesis seems to be gathering steam, slowly. If it actually turns out to be fully validated at some point it would be insane not to invest a very large amount into minimizing exposure everywhere. It would pay for itself 20 years later, easily.
What, like there’s any other reason to bump this thread today?
Last month, 150,000 people paid us $15 to save America with six days of incredible stunts and surprises. For Day One, we used some of the money to purchase a plot of vacant land on the US/Mexico border and retain a law firm specializing in eminent domain to make it as time-consuming and expensive as possible for Trump to build his preposterous wall.
They’ve also built a trebuchet that definitely won’t be used to assault any hypothetical walls, because that would be illegal. But it totally could if they wanted to.
Allow my cynical self to call that a simple PR grab. I mean $100? Is that a limit? Could he have given more?
And did he vote for the Tax Reform Bill?
In fairness, his being a plutocrat isn’t inconsistent with his objecting to pedophiles in office.
More or less this. It’s sad that optimism has become: “Sure he’ll vote to destroy us all, but at least he’s not pro-pedophilia.”
Flake is a pretty hard core conservative, which is why the criticisms of him being a RINO are hollow bullshit. He virtually always supports the GOP position on things.
But he doesn’t support overtly immoral monsters like Trump and Moore.
Because, really, for any reasonable person, supporting such people should be so far over the line that it’s not even in the realm of possibility.
That’s the GOP in a single sentence. Unreasonable people. More to the point, people with no reason. @ArmandoPenblade might go further than that. I might agree.
Dude’s Twitter game is top-notch