Jump to content

Recommended Posts

As is obvious by the title of this topic. This will be the repository for the wonderful life of Republican ideas and just plan bat shit cray-cray.
So let us begin with good ol' Greg Abbott. Warning, sniffing too many fracking fumes might cause slight paranoia and grand delusions of government takeovers.

- Texas Governor Deploys National Guard To Stave Off Obama Takeover -
Wade Goodwyn - NPR

Since General Sam Houston executed his famous retreat to glory to defeat the superior forces of General Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, Texas has been ground zero for military training. We have so many military bases in the Lone Star State we could practically attack Russia.

So when rookie Texas Gov. Greg Abbott announced he was ordering the Texas National Guard to monitor a Navy SEAL/Green Beret joint training exercise, which was taking place in Texas and several other states, everybody here looked up from their iPhones. What?

It seems there is concern among some folks that this so-called training maneuver is just a cover story. What's really going on? President Obama is about to use Special Forces to put Texas under martial law.

Let's walk over by the fence where nobody can hear us, and I'll tell you the story.

You see, there are these Wal-Marts in West Texas that supposedly closed for six months for "renovation." That's what they want you to believe. The truth is these Wal-Marts are going to be military guerrilla-warfare staging areas and FEMA processing camps for political prisoners. The prisoners are going to be transported by train cars that have already been equipped with shackles.

Don't take my word for it. That comes directly from a Texas Ranger, who seems pretty plugged in, if you ask me. You and I both know President Obama has been waiting a long time for this, and now it's happening. It's a classic false flag operation. Don't pay any attention the mainstream media; all they're going to do is lie and attack everyone who's trying to tell you the truth.

"It is important that Texans know their safety, constitutional rights, private property rights and civil liberties will not be infringed upon."

- Gov. Greg Abbott, R-Texas

Did I mention the ISIS terrorists? They've come across the border and are going to hit soft targets all across the Southwest. They've set up camp a few miles outside of El Paso.

That includes a Mexican army officer and Mexican federal police inspector. Not sure what they're doing there, but probably nothing good. That's why the Special Forces guys are here, get it? To wipe out ISIS and impose martial law. So now you know, whaddya say we get back to the party and grab another beer?

It's true that the paranoid world-view of right-wing militia types has remarkable stamina. But that's not news.

What is news is that there seem to be enough of them in Texas to influence the governor of the state to react — some might use the word pander — to them.

That started Monday when a public briefing by the Army in Bastrop County, which is just east of Austin, got raucous. The poor U.S. Army colonel probably just thought he was going to give a regular briefing, but instead 200 patriots shouted him down, told him was a liar and grilled him about the imminent federal takeover of Texas and subsequent imposition of martial law.

"We just want to make sure our guys are trained. We want to hone our skills," Lt. Col. Mark Listoria tried to explain in vain.

One wonders what Listoria was thinking to himself as he walked to his car after two hours of his life he'll never get back. God bless Texas? Maybe not.

The next day Gov. Abbott decided he had to take action. He announced that he was going to ask the State Guard to monitor Operation Jade Helm from start to finish.

"It is important that Texans know their safety, constitutional rights, private property rights and civil liberties will not be infringed upon," Abbott said.

The idea that the Yankee military can't be trusted down here has a long and rich history in Texas. But that was a while back. Abbott's proclamation that he was going to keep his eye on these Navy SEAL and Green Beret boys did rub some of our leaders the wrong way.

Former Texas Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst tried to put it in perspective for outsiders when he explained, "Unfortunately, some Texans have projected their legitimate concerns about the competence and trustworthiness of President Barack Obama on these noble warriors. This must stop."

Another former Republican politician was a bit more pointed.

"Your letter pandering to idiots ... has left me livid," former State Rep. Todd Smith wrote Gov. Abbott. "I am horrified that I have to choose between the possibility that my Governor actually believes this stuff and the possibility that my Governor doesn't have the backbone to stand up to those who do."

There's no argument that after the 2014 election, Texas politics took a further step to the right. The 84th session of the state legislature has given ample proof of that. But the events of this last week have been an eye-opener for Texans of all political stripes.

You will find the names of Texans etched into marble at war memorials from Goliad to Gettysburg, from Verdun to the Ardennes and Washington, D.C. The governor's proposition that these soldiers and sailors constitute a potential threat and need watching as they go about their duties, certainly stakes out some new political ground for the leader of the Texas GOP to stand on.

 
Source: http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2015/05/02/403865824/texas-governor-deploys-national-guard-to-stave-off-obama-takeover

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sen. Jim Inhofe (R-OK) Throws a Snowball on the Senate Floor - as a note Jim Inhofe is currently the Chairman of the Senate Environment Committee :rofl: His indisputable evidence to disprove global warming is the snowball theorem :rofl: You just can't make this shit up...good luck world with these people in charge. Oh, and another small note below...

 

  • In the 2008 election cycle, Inhofe's largest campaign donors represented oil and gas ($446,900 in donations), and electric utilities ($221,654).
  • In 2010, his largest donors represented oil and gas ($429,950) and electric utilities ($206,654) :cain:

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

O.o why does this thread exist except to piss people off?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Because democrats are allowed opinions too.

Like fast track rails to Vegas being more important then desalination plants down the coast of California?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ As a small note, I'm an independent and I despise our two party system. :/
And Cali did drop the ball on drought preparedness :pinch: Thankfully this time around we are fast tracking one of the biggest desalinization plants in the western hemisphere and grey water use is EVERYWHERE including all over my county. Small steps left and right but thankfully the state pushes thru when backed into a corner, innovation & adaptation is our strong suit :hehe: And if you've ever driven to Vegas the proposed Maglev using private funds is a great idea considering how congested the 15 gets :ninja:

Infrastructure > War
 

On 5/3/2015 at 6:06 AM, Prettyphile said:

O.o why does this thread exist except to piss people off?

 
^ Not my intention :whistle: Although part of it is for the laughs due to the sheer lunacy in some of the ideas the Republican party does put out these days. But I mainly created this topic to show how crucial it is to vote and take part in a democracy that way we can rid ourselves of tools such as Jim Inhofe, Rick Scott, and Scott Walker to name a few who've been bought off by oil and other special interest entities. There is no question that today's Republican party is out of touch with what people need, basic rights, and sound science :pinch: Same thing can apply to democrats as well. They aren't exactly all rosy here either but nowhere near the scale of the "grand old party" :ninja:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Ridiculous Quotes from the Republican Debates -

“Juarez is reported to be the most dangerous city in America.”
Rick Perry, referring to a city that is actually in Mexico.

“What people recognize is that there’s a fear that the United States is in an unstoppable decline. They see the rise of China, the rise of India, the rise of the Soviet Union and our loss militarily going forward.”
Michele Bachmann, unaware that the Soviet Union collapsed more than two decades ago.

“Carbon dioxide is portrayed as harmful. But there isn’t even one study that can be produced that shows that carbon dioxide is a harmful gas.”
Michelle Bachmann on the environment. :rofl:

“I think it is high time that we recognize the contribution of our founding fathers who worked tirelessly — men like John Quincy Adams, who would not rest until slavery was extinguished in the country.”
Michele Bachmann, unaware that the founding fathers did not work to end slavery, and that John Quincy Adams was not one of the founding fathers.

“They [China] have indicated that they’re trying to develop nuclear capability and they want to develop more aircraft carriers like we have. So yes, we have to consider them a military threat.”
Herman Cain, unaware that China has been a nuclear threat since 1964.

“I find it interesting that it was back in the 1970s that the swine flu broke out under another Democrat president, Jimmy Carter. I’m not blaming this on President Obama, I just think it’s an interesting coincidence.”
Michele Bachmann on the 1976 Swine Flu outbreak that happened when Gerald Ford, not Jimmy Carter, was president.

MANY MORE TO COME! :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

O.o why does this thread exist except to piss people off?

 

Second that...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

maybe you should rename/reorient this thread: propaganda and disinformation techniques, US politics.  Currently the style of your entries are entirely from the Dem playbook.  I consider myself an independent as well but I find the belief constructs of both parties absurd, not worth taking seriously and not just one...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Well I could change the name but I don't want it to sound too flat to be honest so it shall stay as is considering it's very fitting for the content.  And my playbook also comes from those denying the scientific community and findings on what is contributing to climate change and of course the other controversial topic, evolution (even though there is none for those with some basic understanding). Now I understand this topic might ruffle a few feathers but I'm not here to attack the general populous who might be conservative or Republican. I'm here to attack those in power who serves some of the highest levels of our government who are making decisions towards our environment, economy, healthcare, and our humanity, to outline it all that do not benefit us as a country and the global community. It's no secret the Republican party has been on the wrong end on many of the topics I just listed especially something as profound as climate change. If people want, go ahead and create one for the Democrats. I will gladly contribute to that topic, TPP being a first story I can blast some democrats on. But as of now, the GOP posses the greatest threat to humankind with many of its beliefs on many important topics that currently affect the global community, the most important being climate change, PERIOD!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People, vote these arrogant [email protected]#holes out of office at once!

 

- Forbidden Data, Wyoming just criminalized citizen science -

Imagine visiting Yellowstone this summer. You wake up before dawn to take a picture of the sunrise over the mists emanating from Yellowstone hot springs. A thunderhead towers above the rising sun, and the picture turns out beautifully. You submit the photo to a contest sponsored by the National Weather Service. Under a statute signed into law by the Wyoming governor this spring, you have just committed a crime and could face up to one year in prison.

Wyoming doesn’t, of course, care about pictures of geysers or photo competitions. But photos are a type of data, and the new law makes it a crime to gather data about the condition of the environment across most of the state if you plan to share that data with the state or federal government. The reason? The state wants to conceal the fact that many of its streams are contaminated by E. coli bacteria, strains of which can cause serious health problems, even death. A small organization called Western Watersheds Project (which I represent pro bono in an unrelated lawsuit) has found the bacteria in a number of streams crossing federal land in concentrations that violate water quality standards under the federal Clean Water Act. Rather than engaging in an honest public debate about the cause or extent of the problem, Wyoming prefers to pretend the problem doesn’t exist. And under the new law, the state threatens anyone who would challenge that belief by producing information to the contrary with a term in jail.

Why the desire for ignorance rather than informed discussion? The reason is pure politics. The source of E. coli is clear. It comes from cows spending too much time in and next to streams. Acknowledging that fact could result in rules requiring ranchers who graze their cows on public lands to better manage their herds. The ranching community in Wyoming wields considerable political power and has no interest in such obligations, so the state is trying to stop the flow of information rather than forthrightly address the problem.

If you discover an environmental disaster in Wyoming, you’re obliged, according to this law, to keep it to yourself.

The Clean Water Act and other federal environmental laws recognize that government officials lack the resources and sometimes the political will to address every environmental problem. Ordinary citizens therefore play an integral role in carrying out these laws. The statutes authorize citizens to bring lawsuits against polluters and recalcitrant government agencies, and citizen scientists have long played an important role in gathering information to support better regulations.

The Wyoming law transforms a good Samaritan who volunteers her time to monitor our shared environment into a criminal. Idaho and Utah, as well as other states, have also enacted laws designed to conceal information that could damage their agricultural industries—laws currently being challenged in federal court. But Wyoming is the first state to enact a law so expansive that it criminalizes taking a picture on public land.

The new law is of breathtaking scope. It makes it a crime to “collect resource data” from any “open land,” meaning any land outside of a city or town, whether it’s federal, state, or privately owned. The statute defines the word collect as any method to “preserve information in any form,” including taking a “photograph” so long as the person gathering that information intends to submit it to a federal or state agency. In other words, if you discover an environmental disaster in Wyoming, even one that poses an imminent threat to public health, you’re obliged, according to this law, to keep it to yourself.

Anyone with a passing familiarity with our Constitution will recognize that the Wyoming law is unconstitutional. It runs afoul of the supremacy clause because it interferes with the purposes of federal environmental statutes by making it impossible for citizens to collect the information necessary to bring an enforcement lawsuit. The Wyoming law also violates the First Amendment’s guarantee of free speech because it singles out speech about natural resources for burdensome regulation and makes it a crime to engage in a variety of expressive and artistic activities. And finally, it specifically criminalizes public engagement with federal and state agencies and therefore violates another right guaranteed by the First Amendment: the right to petition the government.

By enacting this law, the Wyoming legislature has expressed its disdain for the freedoms protected by the First Amendment and the environmental protections enshrined in federal statutes. Today, environmentally conscious citizens face a stark choice: They can abandon efforts to protect the lands they love or face potential criminal charges. The United States government should not sit idly by. It should plainly express its disapproval of this law. Ideally, this would entail the U.S. Department of Justice filing a lawsuit to invalidate the Wyoming law, much as it did when it challenged Arizona’s state immigration law as unconstitutional. At the very least, the federal agencies that manage public lands should issue written statements providing express permission for citizen scientists to continue their efforts to protect our shared environment.

STORY LINK: http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2015/05/wyoming_law_against_data_collection_protecting_ranchers_by_ignoring_the.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

- Republicans Attempt to Use Mockery to Cut Sound Science -
By Gayathri Vaidyanathan and ClimateWire

A biologist who allegedly spent $3 million of taxpayer money exercising shrimp on a treadmill has advertised his apparatus on Amazon.com for a cool $1 million.

The treadmill is 13.8 inches long and operates at a speed of 2.2 mph. The average shrimp runs at a mellow 0.75 mph, so that is more than enough to keep a pet critter’s heart healthy, wrote David Scholnick, a professor at Pacific University and treadmill owner.

The posting is more than an exercise in snark; it is Scholnick’s way of defusing politicians who have for years disparaged his research. The National Science Foundation (NSF) funded Scholnick in 2008 to study how marine organisms, like shrimp, cope with diseases caused by bacteria that proliferate due to global warming. His students designed innovate experiments, such as an underwater treadmill, to stress-test their subjects.

Soon after, a video of their shrimp running on a treadmill went viral on YouTube, and Scholnick became the “shrimp-on-a-treadmill” guy. In 2011, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) pointed to the research as an example of wasteful government spending by NSF.

The shrimp saga never ends, Scholnick explained at a meeting organized by the American Association for the Advancement of Science in Washington, D.C., this month. Politicians continue to reduce individual research projects to caricature to justify limits on NSF funding. The latest congressional inquiries into NSF-funded research ended in February, and science societies are now keenly watching Capitol Hill to see how federal research operations get changed.

In recent months, Republican-led House committees have proposed giving Congress greater control over NSF’s research priorities. Climate science programs at NSF and the Department of Energy in 2016 may get cut by 8 percent, while NASA’s earth science budget may be trimmed to $1.45 billion, 25 percent less than the amount President Obama requested for the program (ClimateWire, May 1). The panels may redirect the money to other disciplines considered critical to American innovation, leaving overall research spending at historical levels.

“Conservatives are skeptical of the use of science to support policy regimes they don’t agree with,” Daniel Sarewitz, co-director of the consortium for science, policy and outcomes at Arizona State University, said in an interview in March.

‘Silly’ season has bipartisan roots
The groundwork for these proposals was laid by Coburn, who in 2011 mocked Scholnick and his colleagues’ shrimp research as a symbol of wasteful NSF funding. He was following a time-honored tradition that began with Sen. William Proxmire (D-Wis.), who awarded the Golden Fleece Award between 1975 and 1988 to “silly” research.

Such attacks usually happen at times of economic recessions, Melinda Baldwin, a history of science professor at Harvard University, said at the AAAS meeting. At such times, “the idea of cutting spending holds even more appeal than it usually does,” she said.

But when Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Texas), chairman of the House Science, Space and Technology Committee, took over Coburn’s fight in 2013, his inquiries had a sharper edge. He said that the queries were into grants that do not have sufficient merit, but his queries did not always focus on studies that could be portrayed as a waste of taxpayer money.

In February, Smith targeted a $300,000 grant NSF awarded to Rodney Weber, a senior atmospheric scientist at the Georgia Institute of Technology. Weber had used the 2013 grant to study trees that emit gases that affect people’s respiratory health and contribute to climate change. Together with 12 scientists and many graduate students, he had worked for a month in Centreville, Ala., a town of about 2,800 people. They had rented a house, bought hardware from local stores and contributed to the local economy while working in a forest nearby. Their work was published this year in an academic journal.

“I can’t understand why they picked this grant,” Weber said in an interview in February. Perhaps it is because the grant had something to do with climate change, he suggested tentatively. None of his 12 collaborators was questioned.

Smith is trying to change NSF’s role of setting the nation’s science agenda, Andrew Rosenberg of the Union of Concerned Scientists said in an interview in March. Congress wants to control research because federal agencies increasingly use science to justify regulations, he said.

“Anything that looks like waste gets people riled up, and it casts suspicion on the agency,” he said.

Last year, Smith’s committee staff visited NSF headquarters and studied grant documents for hours, an act unprecedented in NSF history. Over 18 months, the team investigated 63 studies in total.

Political science is suspect, too
Smith’s committee has since turned its attention to NSF funding. The reauthorization bill for the 2010 America Competes Act would allow Congress to specify the amount NSF can grant to particular disciplines. That would, in turn, determine the types of research that gets done in America.

Climate research would be affected because the federal government funds 61 percent of all geoscience research done at universities. The curbs would directly affect people’s lives, Christine McEntee, executive director at the American Geophysical Union, said in a statement.

“When we invest in geoscience research, the knowledge we gain helps to save lives, create jobs, support economic competitiveness, and promote national security for millions of Americans and businesses,” she said.

Other Republican-led committees have targeted NASA’s earth science program, which tracks planetary changes from space. Political science, a field that can get policy moving on climate change, is also being targeted. Very few political scientists today study climate change in part because of the lack of funds, said David Victor, professor of international relations at the University of California, San Diego.

“Here we have one of the world’s most pressing problems, and the entire field of political science has basically ignored it,” Victor said.

You can buy a ‘political plaything’
Knowing they are a pawn in a political game may be small consolation to scientists like Scholnick and Weber. Scientists can counter the politicization and mockery of research by communicating to people how science gets done, said Baldwin of Harvard. Telling people that small experiments, even seemingly silly ones, can advance knowledge helps, she said.

“We can only imagine the headlines if Galileo had gotten grant money to drop spheres off the Leaning Tower of Pisa,” she said.

Scholnick said that if scientists find their work hauled up in the court of public opinion, they should develop a clear narrative about how their research will help national interests. Do not bring a statistical package to a gunfight, he said.

“I think it is important to emphasize, every chance you get, the benefit to the public,” he said.

Humor has helped Scholnick cope with fallout that has been at times intrusive and vicious—he has even been threatened by animal rights groups. The shrimp on a treadmill never seems to die down. As late as March this year, Rep. John Culberson (R-Texas) wrote an email to his constituents saying that the feds should avoid funding wasteful studies about shrimp on a treadmill.

Given the treadmill’s iconic status, Scholnick put it up for sale on Amazon last month. It is a once-in-a-lifetime chance to have “the scientific wonder, the political plaything, the video sensation, the shrimp treadmill prominently displayed in your own home,” he wrote.

“Help support marine biology research, fight erroneous reports of millions of taxpayer dollars going towards shrimp treadmill research, standup for sick shrimp everywhere, or simply have fun exercising your own shrimp.”

STORY LINK: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/republicans-attempt-to-use-mockery-to-cut-sound-science/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Vote Trump! Yes, Let's Vote for Man who's Father was Part of the KKK...

 

Let's Vote for someone who was under investigation back in the 70's and 80's for refusing to rent apartments to black people.


Let's Vote Trump because gay marriage is screwing up your life and he claims he will overturn the Supreme Court's decisions.


Let's Vote for a man who claims the Bible is his favorite book yet when asked to recite a small verse out of it he could not do it.


Let's Vote for a man who runs a fund raiser for homeless vets yet does not turn in the money to the organizations that it was supposed to go to but instead deposited it into the Trump Foundation.


Lets vote for a man who says Americans make too much and wants to cut minimum wage and not help raise it. After all, why would he want to pay his employees anymore then he has to.

 

Let's Vote Trump who says he is bringing jobs back to America yet not only has businesses based out of Mexico but all the merchandise he sells is from Mexico and China.

 

Let's Vote for a man who treats women like dirt on the bottom of his shoe and should be kept barefoot in the kitchen pregnant.
 

Let's Vote for a man who refused to hand in his tax information and is the only one who hasn't handed theirs in sense the 1960's. After all, he doesn't want to share the fact that he is screwing the government over which by the way you screw them they screw us even harder.


Let's Vote for a man who filed bankruptcy 4 times, another way of screwing the government out of paying taxes.


Let's Vote for a man who is endorsed by the head of the and has KKK members showing up at his rallies supporting him and getting violent with people.

 

Let's Vote for Trump because it takes a lot of class to make fun and mock a physically disabled person on national TV.


Let's Vote for a man who claims women should be punished for getting an abortion even though it is legal to get an abortion in the US.


Let's Vote Trump who says immigrants are all just rapists and murders and are the ones bringing drugs over here.


Let's vote a man who wants to build a wall and make Mexico pay for it.


Lets Vote for someone who has no plan of action and can not answer a direct question only dances around the question and changes the subject.


Let's Vote for someone who was always handed whatever he wanted on a golden platter.

 

THERE ARE SO MANY GOOD QUALITIES I JUST DON'T WANT TO GO OVERBOARD...
LET'S MAKE AMERICA GREAT AGAIN!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ Careful or else Trump will find a way to put a 45% tariff on your PONPONPON!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Donald is running a brilliant campaign without even really having any policies or to explain them either. :rofl:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Stromboli1 said:

The Donald is running a brilliant campaign without even really having any policies or to explain them either. :rofl:

 

I am telling you, PURE GENIUS!!! :thumbs_up: 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

1 hour ago, PinkCouture said:

 

I am telling you, PURE GENIUS!!! :thumbs_up: 

 

^ Quite unsettling eh? :ninja: What does that say about Trump or the ones following him for the vote? :idk:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

^ At this point I am planning to grab some snacks, sit back in a safe & secure area, and watch the shit show. As I said before regardless who wins there is going to be a show. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think Bernie can beat Trump, but not Hillary.

 

Hillary's campaign & tactics need a complete overhaul to win the Presidency. She'll probably beat Bernie for the democratic nomination though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
Sign in to follow this  


  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.


×
×
  • Create New...