General Political Thread

[Magnetized]

I will be excoriated on here by my more enlightened brothers and sisters, but I have a hard time working up a sweat about this. Maybe it's because I'm well into the second half of my life and don't have kids and thus don't feel too invested in the future, but it seems to me that we're on a path that will ultimately lead to our destruction. However, I don't think it'll happen in any of our lifetimes or the lifetimes of the next few generations, and really, I guess I feel slightly nihilistic about the whole thing. I don't think there's much that can be done to stop the course we're on--we can slow it down, sure, but at what cost? And ultimately, so what? The earth has lasted though different ages before, and if we humans all get wiped out eventually, well, so be it. Time for another age.

 

My friends are appalled at my cavalier attitude about this, by the way. I would really like to "get it" because I feel like I'm missing something, but I just can't get worked up about climate change. 

[lost highway]

It's like cancer.  You can keep lighting up saying "I'll have to die sometime."  But you're ignoring the harrowing experience you could be setting up.  Human kind isn't going to be gently put to sleep one day and hit a quick reset so the world can evolve new species (although in geological terms it might be close to that, timeline wise).  It is going to be a long, slow, painful dismantling.  People don't treat each other nicely when there is a glaring lack of resources.

 

This doesn't even peak into the ethical crimes of causing countless species of plants and animals to go extinct, while we are investing in our own extinction.

 

I get it though; I can relate.  We live in a time and culture where you are more or less forced to use lots of energy, and produce lots of carbon.  Some folks find some healthy ways to reduce it (bike commuting), but they still come home to a building with electricity, and eat food that had to be transported.  It starts to feel like being mindful of it is a guilt trap from every side.... it kind of is.

[Tweedling]

Global warming is such a heavily debated topic. You can almost find any scientist to support what you want to believe. Are we having an effect on the earth? Sure we are. At what rate and how much it can stand and what tech advances may slow down the human effect on the globe is sure to change over time.

As far a species going extinct I find it amazing that we currently find thousands of new species every year (at least what I've read) but I'm not sure to the more "enlightened" that's any source of hope. Along with the ability for the human race to understand and do something about other species demise.....I'm a glass half full kinda guy.

[Hixter]

Al Gore flies private jets around the globe to preach about global warming to paying audiences and his home burns through $2500 in gas and electricity every month. Russian mobsters control huge chunks of the carbon offset market and nations like China -- the world's biggest polluter -- are given a pass because they are "developing." The whole thing reeks of fraud and money grabbing.

 

Check out the smog at the airport in Beijing last week.

[Magnetized]

It's like cancer.  You can keep lighting up saying "I'll have to die sometime."  But you're ignoring the harrowing experience you could be setting up.  Human kind isn't going to be gently put to sleep one day and hit a quick reset so the world can evolve new species (although in geological terms it might be close to that, timeline wise).  It is going to be a long, slow, painful dismantling.  People don't treat each other nicely when there is a glaring lack of resources.

 

This doesn't even peak into the ethical crimes of causing countless species of plants and animals to go extinct, while we are investing in our own extinction.

 

I get it though; I can relate.  We live in a time and culture where you are more or less forced to use lots of energy, and produce lots of carbon.  Some folks find some healthy ways to reduce it (bike commuting), but they still come home to a building with electricity, and eat food that had to be transported.  It starts to feel like being mindful of it is a guilt trap from every side.... it kind of is.

 

I get what you're saying with the comparison to cancer, but it's really very different. While there are carcinogens out there in the world--some we know about, some we don't--we still have the choice to live in such a way that we can greatly affect our individual chances of getting cancer. What I'm saying about climate change is that no matter what piddling sacrifices or lifestyle choices I make as an individual--and those choices may be morally upright and politically correct, etc.--they're not going to change the overall course of where we're headed. I think the only thing that could have a significant impact is concerted government action around the globe. And I just don't believe that will happen. There are too many sacrifices that people would have to make that would impact their daily lives in ways that I think they would just find unacceptable. So in this case I guess I'm fiddling while Rome burns.

 

By the way, I firmly believe that global climate change is caused by our own behavior. I would guess some small percentage is just the natural evolution of the planet, but most of it is caused by us. So I'm not saying there's some political conspiracy at work. I'm just saying that I don't believe individual choices and actions will make one bit of difference in the grand scheme of things. If there were a large-scale movement to enact regulations that would have a meaningful impact, then sure, I'd be in support of that even though I won't be around to benefit. (I'm not that much of a nihilist!)

[lost highway]

I get what you're saying with the comparison to cancer, but it's really very different. While there are carcinogens out there in the world--some we know about, some we don't--we still have the choice to live in such a way that we can greatly affect our individual chances of getting cancer. What I'm saying about climate change is that no matter what piddling sacrifices or lifestyle choices I make as an individual--and those choices may be morally upright and politically correct, etc.--they're not going to change the overall course of where we're headed. I think the only thing that could have a significant impact is concerted government action around the globe. And I just don't believe that will happen. There are too many sacrifices that people would have to make that would impact their daily lives in ways that I think they would just find unacceptable. So in this case I guess I'm fiddling while Rome burns.

  I can relate to all of that, for sure.  In a lot of ethical, and environmental areas the current trend of the "empowered consumer" who makes lifestyle choices to effect the greater good, can be pretty limiting.  No knock on people who focus on it, there can be lots of good side effects (minimalism, healthy diet, exercise, time with nature etc), but it can prevent people from noticing what you're describing: it requires greater powers and infrastructures to change.  Not just what you buy at the grocery store.

[lost highway]

Al Gore flies private jets around the globe to preach about global warming to paying audiences and his home burns through $2500 in gas and electricity every month. Russian mobsters control huge chunks of the carbon offset market and nations like China -- the world's biggest polluter -- are given a pass because they are "developing." The whole thing reeks of fraud and money grabbing.

 

So because Al Gore flies in a plane, global warming is a conspiracy?  Pretty weak reasoning- straw man kind of deal there.

 

Ask yourself which perception of reality is more financially lucrative:

a.  All the shit we put in the air is ruining the environment.

b.  Everything is fine, continue consuming as much as possible.

[Hixter]

So because Al Gore flies in a plane, global warming is a conspiracy? 

When the people who claim it's an emergency start acting like it's an emergency, then I'll believe it's an emergency.

[lost highway]

You haven't hung out around geologists, or environmental scientists much lately, have you?

 

I think another problem with sensing the urgency is so many people feel the way Wilco Me, was describing.  For people who understand the problem, there aren't a lot of viable solutions.  Carbon production seems tied to almost everything a modern society does.

 

I know the whole "weather where I live" analysis is comically off-base.  Our friends freezing in NYC will attest to it.  John Stewart was ripping on that perspective last night-  anyways.... I'm sitting in Denver CO, where January and February are our coldest months.  It is 65 degrees F right now.  And it's about the fifth time it has gotten that hot this month.  It's weird.  Not in a "Ah-ha I can prove climate change with today's weather" kind of way.  More like: "Oh, so as the planet changes Denver is going to be more like Phoenix.  So Phoenix is going to be more like a burning death in a strip mall."

[Winston Legthigh]

Al Gore flies private jets around the globe to preach about global warming to paying audiences and his home burns through $2500 in gas and electricity every month. Russian mobsters control huge chunks of the carbon offset market and nations like China -- the world's biggest polluter -- are given a pass because they are "developing." The whole thing reeks of fraud and money grabbing.

 

Check out the smog at the airport in Beijing last week.

I don't think the situation in China is akin to being given a pass. It's more like how exactly do you stop a juggernaut like China from polluting the fuck out of the world? Good luck.

[Hixter]

I don't think the situation in China is akin to being given a pass. It's more like how exactly do you stop a juggernaut like China from polluting the fuck out of the world? Good luck.

The treaties are supposed to be legally binding, but the United States, Europe and Japan are expected to abide while China, India and Brazil are given a pass. It's as much about redistribution of wealth and power as it is saving the planet. That's why the treaties are doomed to fail.

[Griddles]

I always view this situation as standard prisoners dilemma. If (for simple sake I'll just use China and the US, but expand as needed) both countries put holds on carbon emissions, prices go up, but the planet is better off. If one country does and the other does not, the country with no controls come out ahead and the planet is half better off. If both do not put any controls in place, neither gets left behind and the planet is worse off. In this case, because neither country trust the other fully to abide by regulations it makes sense for neither to agree to limits. There needs to be some incentive  immediate and strong, to entice both countries to agree to controls. I don't really see that though. 

[Hixter]

Senator Feinstein's "assault" weapon bill exempts "government officials." Of course it does, laws are only for the little people.

 

 

The legislation also excludes:

• Weapons used by government officials, law enforcement and retired law enforcement.

 

http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/press-releases?ID=5dffbf07-d8e5-42aa-9f22-0743368dd754

[KevinG]

The gun debate in this and the other thread has become tiresome.  I don't know why I get myself so worked up.  I will never change anyones mind, nor will my mind be changed.  Sigh

 

Anyway, I love how the GOP obstructionist have come to a whole new level.  I am talking about the Hagel nomination.  For the first time in history a confirmation was held up by filibuster.  And this was not because of questions on Hagel's qualifications, no it was an extortion vote.  Refusing to vote until the White House provided additional information on Bengazi.  Regardless of what you think happened in Bengazi and who is at fault, to hold up a key cabinet position is ridiculous.  This is not how government should work.   

 

As John McCain said a filibuster would set the wrong precent.  But you know who voted to uphold the filibuster, the senior senator form AZ.  Nice job!  Slow clap all around.  

 

Our current government is the picture of disfunction and the majority of the blame lies directly on at the feet of the GOP.  Sigh.     

[uncool2pillow]

This Republican agrees.

[Hixter]

Hagel's hearing was a train wreck. However distasteful the method, it's in the nation's best interest that he is not confirmed.

[Mr. Heartbreak]

Hagel's hearing was a train wreck. However distasteful the method, it's in the nation's best interest that he is not confirmed.

I agree. Obama should find a well-qualified Democrat who is more of a peacenik than Hagel.

[KevinG]

Hagel's hearing was a train wreck. However distasteful the method, it's in the nation's best interest that he is not confirmed.

 

I actually think the method is more harmful to the nation then Hagel himself.  Hagel may not be the best candidate or whatever, but to hold a confirmation hostage is terrible.  All confirmations should be based on the candidate's qualifications.  If they are qualified vote yes, if not vote no.  I also firmly believe a candidate's political views should not play into the confirmation.  It is solely on qualifications.

 

But this act by the GOP demanding something to end the filibuster is down right obscene.

 

The more and more the GOP talks the sound like whiny petulant little children who are going to hold their breath until they get their way.       

[LouieB]

Hagel wiil get the job.  This is just a bunch of political bullshit at the moment.

 

LouieB

[Hixter]

Hagel wiil get the job.

God help us.

[KevinG]

God help us.

 

 So what about his qualifications preclude him from being Sec. of Defense?  

[Hixter]

 So what about his qualifications preclude him from being Sec. of Defense?  

His performance under fire was abysmal. He came across as weak and unsure of himself and those are not the qualities that our SecDef should display. He's spent the last few weeks denying, retracting and apologizing for things he's said over the last several years, so nobody really knows what his actual viewpoints are, but it's fairly clear that he's soft on Iran, hard on Israel and eager to cut our military at a time when adversaries like China and Russia are flexing their military might aggressively in our direction. Add in the fact that he's Republican and he becomes President Obama's wet dream of A SecDef, but I believe his confirmation would cause grave damage to an already shaky military.

[lost highway]

 hard on Israel

 

What do you mean by this?

[KevinG]

... but I believe his confirmation would cause grave damage to an already shaky military.

 

That is a huge statement, please explain.

 

The reason I am asking this is not to be contrary or anything like that, but it is because I honestly don't know much about Hagel, nor what effect he would have on the state of the Military.  I can only assume the PBO is like the CEO and the Sec of Def is like the COO.  I guess that is the only way I can get my head around it, and not sure that is right anyway.  

 

Your other statements about being soft on Iran and hard on Israel are policy positions.  I am not sure one should hold policy positions against a person during a confirmation.  Though you do bring up a good point on how poorly his confirmation hearings went.  

[ih8music]

He's personally seen the brutal reality of war and isn't gung-ho into starting another one w/ Iran just because Israel wants it, especially considering how over-stretched our forces have been due to constant fighting the past decade. Sounds like the right position to me.

 

And I love how republicans want to cut spending on everything under the sun, but when the idea of reducing military spending is proposed it's considered borderline treasonous. We spend more on our military than China, Russia & the next umpteen countries combined. We will still be #1 militarily despite any cuts.