patrick.net

Earth Isn’t Doomed Yet. NYT says so:
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/11/29/business/economy/trumps-climate-policies-may-work-out-in-the-planets-favor.html?ref=business

He has to deal with pesky rules he doesn't even know exist.

-----------------

Why should anyone be expected to obey rules that they couldn't possibly be expected to know exist in the first place?

There's far too many rules already, the most refreshing thing about Trump is his propensity to break them

Yep, I imagine errc might feel differently if someone stole his car or beat his wife. Suddenly laws are more important then.

SQUAWK!

SQUAWK!SQUAWK!

SQUAWK!SQUAWK!SQUAWK!

SQUAWK!SQUAWK!

SQUAWK!SQUAWK!SQUAWK!

Taking a page out of Hillary's play book
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2016/11/29/trump-takes-heat-for-wanting-to-outlaw-flag-burning-but-clinton-wanted-same-in-2005.html

And you're happy about that? Taking a page out of Hillary's playbook is OK with you?

smaulgld says

And you're happy about that? Taking a page out of Hillary's playbook is OK with you?

Are you okay with voting for a flag burning ban advocate?
How about a border wall as both Clintons have expressed support for?

He has to deal with pesky rules he doesn't even know exist.

----------------

Why should anyone be expected to obey rules that they couldn't possibly be expected to know exist in the first place?

There's far too many rules already, the most refreshing thing about Trump is his propensity to break them

---------------

That's a fascinating viewpoint. So you believe the most refreshing thing about the man responsible for running the executive branch of government, as in the man responsible for executing our laws, is that he has no problem breaking or ignoring them.

Brilliant.

----------------

Absolutely. The entire system of laws is shit.

There's a law on the books that forces you to either purchase a terrible, worthless product from private corporations, or pay a penalty to The State.

There's another law that prohibits you from utilizing flowers from plants to secure your life, liberty, health, and pursuit of happiness. If you break this law, the State can kick down your door, seize everything and anything you've worked hard to earn, destroy your property, cause you physical harm, and toss you in a prison cell.

There's nothing more UnAmerican than obeying these terrible laws.

---------------------

I see this is where you part company with reason.

Anarchists are incomprehensibly stupid and none of their arguments hold up to even the most amateur scrutiny.

--------------------

Where did i suggest Anarchy?

I simply suggested that disregarding BAD laws, is something to be celebrated. I see that you obedient little anti-americans aren't even allowed to think about, or discuss such things. This reflects poorly on you, not me.

zzyzzx is deplorable says

Meanwhile in Latvia:

https://www.reddit.com/r/LatvianJokes/

"Are you okay with voting for a flag burning ban advocate?
How about a border wall as both Clintons have expressed support for?"

No to both. Clinton is far from my ideal candidate.

america is dead thanks to D & R voters. Might as well cremate the flag.

Trump is the leader Degenerate America is ready for now.
According to recent research, the share of Americans who say that Army rule would be a “good” or “very good” thing had risen to 1 in 6 in 2014, compared with 1 in 16 in 1995. History shows that 15% is plenty to lead the mob into madness.

The number of Americans who say that living in a democracy is "essential"has fallen to around 30%, from 75% in the 30's.

Forty percent of millennials think government should be able to stop people from "offending" minority groups,
and a clear majority of Democrats polled want to criminalize “hate speech", so what's left of the "Left" was no bastion of Liberty.

Robert Sproul says

and a clear majority of Democrats polled want to criminalize “hate speech", so what's left of the "Left" was no bastion of Liberty.

And a significant portion of the Ron Paul/Libertarian crowd became flat out NeoReax/Hard AltRight/NeoFeudalists over the past 8 years.

he's exercising his 1st amendment right.

NuttBoxer says

Sources from NASA and scientists who have actually been to Antarctica and measured sea ice otherwise...

It's called global warming, not antarctic warming. Try to keep up with the class.

https://patrick.net/?p=1299598&c=1352405#comment-1352405

Entitlemented says

What about solutions to Global Warming?

rando says

If global warming continues, we're all going to need to move to Canada permanently!

It's not the heat. It's the tides.

Sorry, but I live in those places and that's a shit ton of real estate being wiped out. If the company I work for has to move because all the land around it is now occupied by fishes, is everyone in the company going to move with it? What about all the small businesses like laundromats, bars, restaurants, night clubs, clothing outlets, etc. that will simply cease to exist. Their employees will have to move elsewhere when their houses are literally under water, but those jobs won't magic to the former employee's new location.

There are very real economic consequences of sea-level rises, and that's just one aspect of climate change.

Losing land, especially the most economically productive land, is highly disruptive to the economy and very costly. Even ignoring the ethical and environmental concerns, the mere financial problems of climate change would make any sensible person terrified.

And in the long run, it gets even worse. It will cost orders of magnitudes more to terraform the Earth back to it's state in the 1970s then it would to simply not fuck up the Earth in the first place. Polluting the Earth makes no economic sense. It's short-term greed causing long-term economic devastation. There's a reason we don't let people throw their garbage out on the street. It's far more economical to pack that trash into nice little bags that are systematically removed and processed. The same goes for all waste products. Pollution is basically trash being thrown out on the street disrupting traffic and making the entire city of Earth less productive and a less enjoyable place to live.

Well, we'll never know. What we do know is that Trump has definitely proven that he IS for more Corporatism!!

Forget Glass Steagall now, bitch.

Looks like Trumpligula is getting the strong finger poke in the chest from the shadow government.

joeyjojojunior says

Well, we'll never know. What we do know is that Trump has definitely proven that he IS for more Corporatism!!

Obama proved that 8 years ago, when the campaign advisers we were promised would be put in positions of power were shunted off to powerless White Paper Committees while Citigroup picked the Cabinet.

"Obama proved that 8 years ago, when the campaign advisers we were promised would be put in positions of power were shunted off to powerless White Paper Committees while Citigroup picked the Cabinet."

And you thought you were getting something different with Trump. Bwahahaha

joeyjojojunior says

And you thought you were getting something different with Trump. Bwahahaha

And you thought it would be much better with a Corporate Clinton, bwwahahahahahahah

"And you thought it would be much better with a Corporate Clinton, bwwahahahahahahah"

I did? Not that I recall.

Thunderlips is Tovbot2 says

And you thought it would be much better with a Corporate Clinton

Trump campaigned on change and draining the swamp and Clitlicker is the Wall Street puppet, ar oh ef fucking el!

The sock puppet hand fits comfortably in either candidate, with the bird finger in perpetual salute to the electorate.

The American Economy's poop chute is lubed and ready for GoSacks and Wall Street!

Oh, it's catastrophic again, give me all your money and control of the energy industry and I will kiss and make it all better.

Holy fuck. You fucking BS environmentalists, who love the earth, but hate plants, animals, and people are screaming like banshees about ice melting that will destroy us in a 100 years!!?? Forget about the record number of carcinogens introduced into the world during the 21st century. Forget about the record pesticide use that's decimating bee populations who are ONLY needed to keep 80% of the worlds plants alive. Forget about GMO crops that are cross pollinating/polluting all wheat, soy, and corn crops, and carry gene altering, carcinogens. Forget about non-biodegradable plastics courtesy of DuPont that have created an island of trash in our oceans that will never go away. Forget about BP dumping a billion gallons of oil into the gulf, causing sea life mutations. Forget about the military industrial complex turing the Middle East into one giant toxic bomb crater. IT'S THE FUCKING ICE MELTING!! THAT'S WHAT WILL KILL US ALL!!!!

Change you can believe in

Deja Vu

KILL THE PEOPLE! KILL THEM ALL! THE VILE SWARMING CONTAMINATION OF THE PURE EARTH!

Judging by the number of billionaires in this gov, it may be a little less corporatism and a little more plutocracy.
Most of the time we won't tell the difference.
Prepare your bucket of Vaseline.

NuttBoxer says

Forget about the record number of carcinogens introduced into the world during the 21st century....

Those other environmental problems are very tangible and easy to see. With global warming the response to pollution is delayed and harder to see. It also has much more catastrophic risk. There are clearly nonlinear feedback loops causing CO2 and temp to fluctuate together over the long haul. There is a big time delay (on our time scale) due to the time it takes CO2 to diffuse out of the oceans. The lag in CO2 levels is explained by this. There is a good video at the bottom of the page here: http://www.skepticalscience.com/co2-lags-temperature.htm
What is not in the video is that radiation is a higher order item that kicks in at higher temperatures, and is why the whole thing doesn't continue as an exponential increase in temperature. Common sense and intuition don't tell us what will happen with our huge CO2 injection. That's what science is for. It's a high risk game we are playing.

One amendment down, 26 to go!

FP says

Apparently burning the flag it is not a litmus test for personal freedom.

It doesn't have to be. It is still a major factor in how free a country is.

A country whose government uses violence and the threat of violence to stop people from burning symbols of state power is not a country that is free. Such an assault against liberty is far more Unamerican than communism ever was. It is antithetical to all of western philosophy.

Anyone who would have the government stop people from burning flags is neither brave nor free. Such a person is also unpatriotic. Real patriotism is supporting your countrymen against the government. Rebellion is patriotic. This country was founded on rebellion. If you aren't a rebel, you aren't a real American.

This is damning evidence...

Tenpoundbass says

http://www.breitbart.com/2016-presidential-race/2016/11/29/flashback-sen-hillary-clinton-files-bill-punishing-flag-burners-one-year-jail/

President-elect Donald Trump isn’t the first person to propose punishment for burning the American flag. Consider theFlag Protection Act of 2005, co-sponsored by then-Sen. Hillary Clinton (D.-N.Y.).

"This is damning evidence..."

Yep, it shows that Trump is no different than any other politician of the last 20 years.

It's amazing how everyone continues to redirect the conversation to Clinton rather than face up to the fact that they were sold a bill of goods by Trump.

Thunderlips is Tovbot2 says

Sanders and Warren don't have much power NOW,

They are still members of the Big Club.

zzyzzx is deplorable says

No hypocrisy by liberals, just leftist and rightist conservatives.

It is legal and protected speech to burn either. Either can, but is not necessarily, hate speech. The later is more likely hate speech as it is directed against people whereas flag burning is typically directed at governments if done by their own citizens. Flag burning of other nations is far more likely to be actual hate speech. But in either case, it's legally protected speech. Yes, you can express hate and sometimes it's appropriate.

The left is hypocritical whenever they attempt to outlaw burning of the Quran. The right is hypocritical whenever they attempt to outlaw burning of the flag. The right has burned many books including religious books.

The burning of books, even "bad" books, is more repugnant since you are borderline trying to suppress the debate of ideas, whereas the burning of flags is typically a condemnation of a government and its recent actions. So the two acts aren't equivalent in their message. But still, both messages are protected speech.

Personally I don't think that flag burning actually accomplishes anything. It's just an outcry of rage against a government, but that's exactly why governments seek to ban it. Governments don't like any expression of condemnation directed at them. And that's why it's important that flag burning be protected as a sacred right.

Despite being an ineffective message, because flag burning is a condemnation of one's own government, it is ironically far more patriotic than flag waving. Real patriotism is opposing your government in order to protect your countrymen.