12-05-2014 05:51 AM
179 ... 34567 ...
tools
  1. hydrogen3's Avatar
    something that's always puzzled me. Republicans are called the War Party, but Democrats have gotten us into virtually every war, major or minor, of the 20th century.

    Woodrow Wilson: Declared war on Germany, involving the U.S. in WWI — Progressive; Mr. New World Order

    FDR: Declared war on Japan, involving the U.S. in WWII Progressive — Mr. New Deal; Made Depression worse

    Harry Truman: Ordered two nuclear weapons detonated in Japan — Democrat

    Harry Truman: Involved U.S. in the Korean War — Democrat

    JFK: Initiated U.S. involvement in Vietnam — Democrat

    LBJ: Escalated the Vietnam War, mismanaged it, lost it — Democrat

    Jimmy Carter: Projected weakness, encouraged Jihad — Democrat

    Bill Clinton: Did nothing about genocide in Rwanda, bombed Kosovo, further encouraged Jihad projecting weakness, leading to 9/11 — Democrat

    Barack Obama: Combines pacifism, globalism, communism, projecting weakness and retreat and surrender, allowing for escalations of global jihad in every direction, destroyed the economy — Democrat/Progressive/Communist/Globalist
    11-17-2014 02:14 PM
  2. palandri's Avatar
    Click on "avatar". Go to "forum profile". Left side click on "Add To Ignore List"
    A895 and anon(92475) like this.
    11-17-2014 02:56 PM
  3. grover5's Avatar
    Click on "avatar". Go to "forum profile". Left side click on "Add To Ignore List"
    Tempting...but he is so entertaining.

    Posted via the Android Central App
    A895 likes this.
    11-17-2014 02:59 PM
  4. hydrogen3's Avatar
    Click on "avatar". Go to "forum profile". Left side click on "Add To Ignore List"
    Censorship
    11-17-2014 04:15 PM
  5. hydrogen3's Avatar
    The truth often is.
    11-17-2014 04:18 PM
  6. anon8126715's Avatar
    I realize Alabama ranks quite low. A common joke is usually "thank God for Mississippi, otherwise we be last in everything."

    Education is an interesting area. Believe me, I'm in school for Social Sciences Education. The Alabama Education Association (AEA) has dominated the state for years. Until recently, the AEA had the Alabama House and Senate (not completely sure of Senate) completely under their control with Democrats. Their power was so great, it is only now that Republicans control Alabama that anyone dares to challenge them.

    Back on point though, Alabamians have long been focused on areas other than Education. It is getting better, but remember, until the 1940s, and I'm going to say the 1970s, Alabama didn't have many high paying jobs available that needed higher education. Until this time frame, many dropped out or just got a high school degree and worked on the farm or in the family business. On top of that, consider the state's past with Civil Rights. It is only post-70s that all ethnicities can go to the same school. I'm not trying to make excuses. Alabama still has a long way to go, but with moderate shifts toward education, along with Common Core, there is hope on the horizon.

    On the income front, I believe that it ties directly into education. There are high paying jobs coming into the state. Alabama has a great environment for business. I'm curious, I haven't looked at your link, but is it saying that compared to a nationwide average? If so, I'm going to call it inaccurate. You have to take into account the Cost of Living. In my area, $40,000 per year can easily be considered middle class. That's one person's income.

    Alabama hasn't been complete red for that long. However, this state is rather Conservative. There isn't much difference between a Republican and a Democrat here. Sure, there are some, but not as much as on the national level.

    Posted via the Android Central App
    I think in that link, they tried to account for cost of living, mostly housing costs as that has a lot to do with it, but what's interesting is that the cost of housing typically coincides with high paying jobs and a good climate. If you look at states on the west coast where the climate is moderate, their housing is crazy expensive, but then again they do have a lot of well paying jobs.

    I will admit that I mostly base my inquiry on my own state's record. We are mostly red in the state of Texas and the biggest issue we have right now is with the right wing trying to inject religious teaching into our school's curriculum, which for the life of me I can't understand why state resources are going towards funding a religious doctrine that can't be proven via scientific evidence. You may as well throw money into teaching that the world is flat as far as I'm concerned.
    11-17-2014 05:53 PM
  7. anon8126715's Avatar
    We all know climate change/climate collapse is a hoax...It democratic fear mongering that the sky is falling..Truth is the earth has not warmed in 20 years. The ice caps are expanding..

    Remember:: Former vice president Al Gore, won a Nobel Prize in 2007 for claiming that there is a dangerous man-made global warming that threatens the world. However, it has since been revealed that he convinced many people through inaccurate information in his "documentary," i.e., he only won the Nobel Prize by lying.
    Even if this were REMOTELY true, why would cutting our dependency on non-renewable resources be a bad thing? You know why? Because you've been programmed to believe that it would be bad by big oil. Funny how that works, try to debunk something that would benefit our ENTIRE COUNTRY to the benefit of just a few wealthy individuals.
    11-17-2014 05:58 PM
  8. anon8126715's Avatar
    Click on "avatar". Go to "forum profile". Left side click on "Add To Ignore List"

    At least it's amusing to see his obvious bias. His list of "war mongering" Democratic Presidents is funny, especially when you look at some of his citations. "Jimmy Carter: Projected weakness....", which is the same thing people are currently saying about Obama yet his original thought is why he thinks the GOP is considered the "War Party". Can we say "talk out of both sides of your mouth much"?

    I'm tempted to start a thread on Ronald Reagan just to see what kind of delusions we'll see, "Oh he was the greatest ever", "He was a saint!", even though he raised taxes, spent like a fool, bargained with Iran, and nationalized hundreds of thousands of illegal aliens. I won't even get into the Iran Contra arms thing...... I say un-ignore and just enjoy all the delusion....
    palandri, grover5 and A895 like this.
    11-17-2014 06:11 PM
  9. Mooncatt's Avatar
    Even if this were REMOTELY true, why would cutting our dependency on non-renewable resources be a bad thing? You know why? Because you've been programmed to believe that it would be bad by big oil. Funny how that works, try to debunk something that would benefit our ENTIRE COUNTRY to the benefit of just a few wealthy individuals.
    I'm all for a clean environment, but within reason. The global warming/climate change issue has become too politicized even if it were true. The EPA has run amok instituting overbearing regulations that are harming the economy without much benefit. There's also CARB (the California equivalent of the EPA) that is even more strict and affecting interstate and international commerce with their rules. If you want to sell anything in that state, you have to make sure your product is CARB compliant in addition to any applicable EPA regulations or they will hit you with massive fines. A state should not have that much power.

    And while we have these changes forced on us, the most polluting places in the world are going more or less untouched. Where's the GW/CC crowds pushing for changes world wide? Pollution spreads, but you don't see much pressure put on places like China to clean up their act, leaving the trade winds to blow that mess across the ocean to our shores.
    11-17-2014 06:35 PM
  10. anon8126715's Avatar
    I'm all for a clean environment, but within reason. The global warming/climate change issue has become too politicized even if it were true. The EPA has run amok instituting overbearing regulations that are harming the economy without much benefit. There's also CARB (the California equivalent of the EPA) that is even more strict and affecting interstate and international commerce with their rules. If you want to sell anything in that state, you have to make sure your product is CARB compliant in addition to any applicable EPA regulations or they will hit you with massive fines. A state should not have that much power.

    And while we have these changes forced on us, the most polluting places in the world are going more or less untouched. Where's the GW/CC crowds pushing for changes world wide? Pollution spreads, but you don't see much pressure put on places like China to clean up their act, leaving the trade winds to blow that mess across the ocean to our shores.
    I think Obama made some agreements (non-binding at that) with China on trying to push for clean air. The GOP cried foul, so I will agree that it has become extremely politicized.

    The only problem I have when people say that it's too expensive, we're technically already paying for it. Look at Hurricane Sandy, the BP Gulf coast spill, and the plethora of tornadoes that have touched down (at higher magnitudes than used to be the case). You don't have to be a "scientist" to understand that something is going on with our environment, although I will say that considering I'm well into my 40s, I have the benefit of seeing these changes first hand. I don't remember these storms being so severe in the past. I also remember as a child being able to play outside in the summer without feeling as though the sun was baking me (do we even care about the Ozone anymore?) The costs are there, it's just the costs are being absorbed by the middle and lower class. Big business and commerce don't care, and that's what worries me most, at what point do we stop trying to pass the buck to the people that can least afford it and hold those that stand to gain the most accountable?
    A895 likes this.
    11-17-2014 06:53 PM
  11. grover5's Avatar
    I'm all for a clean environment, but within reason. The global warming/climate change issue has become too politicized even if it were true. The EPA has run amok instituting overbearing regulations that are harming the economy without much benefit. There's also CARB (the California equivalent of the EPA) that is even more strict and affecting interstate and international commerce with their rules. If you want to sell anything in that state, you have to make sure your product is CARB compliant in addition to any applicable EPA regulations or they will hit you with massive fines. A state should not have that much power.

    And while we have these changes forced on us, the most polluting places in the world are going more or less untouched. Where's the GW/CC crowds pushing for changes world wide? Pollution spreads, but you don't see much pressure put on places like China to clean up their act, leaving the trade winds to blow that mess across the ocean to our shores.
    If your economy can only succeed by using dirty fuel then your business owners suck at what they do. The economy would be in much better shape if it were innovating and investing in R&D for future energy at a higher level. The EPA is more toothless than its ever been. Suggesting its run amok is hyperbole driven by willful ignorance.

    Posted via the Android Central App
    11-17-2014 06:58 PM
  12. grover5's Avatar
    The truth often is.
    It is your truth that is entertaining. But it is also sad to see someone immersed in delusion. But if you're happy and doing no real damage to yourself or others...then its just entertainment on an internet forum.

    Posted via the Android Central App
    A895 likes this.
    11-17-2014 07:05 PM
  13. grover5's Avatar
    I think Obama made some agreements (non-binding at that) with China on trying to push for clean air. The GOP cried foul, so I will agree that it has become extremely politicized.

    The only problem I have when people say that it's too expensive, we're technically already paying for it. Look at Hurricane Sandy, the BP Gulf coast spill, and the plethora of tornadoes that have touched down (at higher magnitudes than used to be the case). You don't have to be a "scientist" to understand that something is going on with our environment, although I will say that considering I'm well into my 40s, I have the benefit of seeing these changes first hand. I don't remember these storms being so severe in the past. I also remember as a child being able to play outside in the summer without feeling as though the sun was baking me (do we even care about the Ozone anymore?) The costs are there, it's just the costs are being absorbed by the middle and lower class. Big business and commerce don't care, and that's what worries me most, at what point do we stop trying to pass the buck to the people that can least afford it and hold those that stand to gain the most accountable?
    Well said. Don't forget the floods, droughts and hurricanes.

    Posted via the Android Central App
    11-17-2014 07:07 PM
  14. Mooncatt's Avatar
    The BP spill and the like are obviously man made, and those companies should be held accountable. When it comes to weather events, that's another story. That's cyclical, and our frame of reference is relatively small. We don't have any way to know how strong storms were before we started recording the weather. We've also increased our accuracy since those first days, so we're now catching things that would have been missed decades and centuries ago. To immediately say global warming exists because Texas got hotter the past few summers would be like me saying we're entering an ice age because Wisconsin got hammered last winter. It's all about perspective.

    Something else to consider when listening to the global warming crowd: the U.S. has come a long way in recent years. We no longer have stories here like the horrible L.A. smog or the Ohio river that was so polluted that it caught fire. The new truck emissions are cleaner than the air going in when in L.A. (when the emissions systems work right), and that Ohio river was cleaned up pretty nice. Even with continued expansion, our pollution is going down in this country. Now compare that to the stronger storms. You'd think the storms wouldn't be so bad with our improvements.

    So either emissions doesn't affect the climate as much as they think, or it's pollution from other places causing it now without any real effort to change. In either case, it shows how the whole movement is just a politicized mess. Either every country should be made to adhere to better standard (none of this nonbinding b.s.), or these groups need to back off their destructive agendas.
    11-17-2014 07:38 PM
  15. grover5's Avatar
    The BP spill and the like are obviously man made, and those companies should be held accountable. When it comes to weather events, that's another story. That's cyclical, and our frame of reference is relatively small. We don't have any way to know how strong storms were before we started recording the weather. We've also increased our accuracy since those first days, so we're now catching things that would have been missed decades and centuries ago. To immediately say global warming exists because Texas got hotter the past few summers would be like me saying we're entering an ice age because Wisconsin got hammered last winter. It's all about perspective.

    Something else to consider when listening to the global warming crowd: the U.S. has come a long way in recent years. We no longer have stories here like the horrible L.A. smog or the Ohio river that was so polluted that it caught fire. The new truck emissions are cleaner than the air going in when in L.A. (when the emissions systems work right), and that Ohio river was cleaned up pretty nice. Even with continued expansion, our pollution is going down in this country. Now compare that to the stronger storms. You'd think the storms wouldn't be so bad with our improvements.

    So either emissions doesn't affect the climate as much as they think, or it's pollution from other places causing it now without any real effort to change. In either case, it shows how the whole movement is just a politicized mess. Either every country should be made to adhere to better standard (none of this nonbinding b.s.), or these groups need to back off their destructive agendas.
    It isn't global warming. Its climate change. The common argument made by those who don't make a living by it and fear change is that there isn't enough time to judge and how could they know for sure. Its the couch quarterback on steroids. 97% of the climate scientists on the planet agree that our activity is speeding up climate change significantly but mooncatt needs more to go on. No amount would appease you. Your decision is based on fear of change and uncertainty of what it will mean for the future. Arguing against climate change is no less than arguing the earth is flat. I cannot respect that view.

    Posted via the Android Central App
    A895 likes this.
    11-17-2014 07:45 PM
  16. Mooncatt's Avatar
    The EPA is more toothless than its ever been. Suggesting its run amok is hyperbole driven by willful ignorance.
    I'm not going to claim to know about everything the EPA covers, but I've seen first hand just what kind of problems they've caused just in my industry alone. I'm sure they didn't just single out trucking companies to screw over.
    11-17-2014 07:53 PM
  17. Mooncatt's Avatar
    It isn't global warming. Its climate change....97% of the climate scientists on the planet agree that our activity is speeding up climate change significantly but mooncatt needs more to go on.
    First off, it was global warming when this all started coming about. Now that their predictions haven't come true, they are calling it climate change. Don't blame me, blame the people changing the name.

    But let's say those scientists are correct that it's all man made. Well, the U.S. has done more than its part. To expect us to do more while ignoring more polluting countries shows the GW/CC crowd is only concerned about their political gain. If they were truly concerned about the problem, no country should get a free pass at polluting.

    *edit* Speaking of the Earth being flat, your argument that 97% of scientists agree with GW/CC sounds a lot like those that thought the Earth was flat because the scientists back then all thought it was too. At least I'm putting thought into my view instead of simply towing the line.
    11-17-2014 08:04 PM
  18. anon8126715's Avatar
    First off, it was global warming when this all started coming about. Now that their predictions haven't come true, they are calling it climate change. Don't blame me, blame the people changing the name.

    But let's say those scientists are correct that it's all man made. Well, the U.S. has done more than its part. To expect us to do more while ignoring more polluting countries shows the GW/CC crowd is only concerned about their political gain. If they were truly concerned about the problem, no country should get a free pass at polluting.

    *edit* Speaking of the Earth being flat, your argument that 97% of scientists agree with GW/CC sounds a lot like those that thought the Earth was flat because the scientists back then all thought it was too. At least I'm putting thought into my view instead of simply towing the line.
    It's kind of hard to tell countries that are growing exponentially (India and China) that they must cut their own growth now because of the planet while the U.S. has already expanded its economy. Compound that with the fact that we have a very divided political body about the science. On one side you have people that want to heed the scientists' studies, and on the other side you have people that think one of us will be told to build a ship so that we can carry around 2 of every type of animal.
    grover5 and A895 like this.
    11-17-2014 09:13 PM
  19. grover5's Avatar
    First off, it was global warming when this all started coming about. Now that their predictions haven't come true, they are calling it climate change. Don't blame me, blame the people changing the name.

    But let's say those scientists are correct that it's all man made. Well, the U.S. has done more than its part. To expect us to do more while ignoring more polluting countries shows the GW/CC crowd is only concerned about their political gain. If they were truly concerned about the problem, no country should get a free pass at polluting.

    *edit* Speaking of the Earth being flat, your argument that 97% of scientists agree with GW/CC sounds a lot like those that thought the Earth was flat because the scientists back then all thought it was too. At least I'm putting thought into my view instead of simply towing the line.
    My tone is bad sometimes. I get frustrated. I apologize. I'd be interested in hearing how the EPA negatively impacts your livelihood.

    The reason global warming has been changed to climate change is in part due to the impacts of a warming planet leading to many outcomes. The link below references one that I've been following for years. It was in the Pentagon papers as one of the larger threats to our security. An interesting read.

    http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases...1219153611.htm

    Posted via the Android Central App
    A895 likes this.
    11-17-2014 09:16 PM
  20. Mooncatt's Avatar
    It's kind of hard to tell countries that are growing exponentially (India and China) that they must cut their own growth now because of the planet while the U.S. has already expanded its economy. Compound that with the fact that we have a very divided political body about the science. On one side you have people that want to heed the scientists' studies, and on the other side you have people that think one of us will be told to build a ship so that we can carry around 2 of every type of animal.
    And thus the hypocrisy. All pollution affects the atmosphere the same, regardless of who made it. If you are that serious about it, you wouldn't be saying countries like the U.S. have to save the planet at all costs, but give developing countries a free pass. They should be using the same cleaner processes everyone else is being told to use too.

    My tone is bad sometimes. I get frustrated. I apologize. I'd be interested in hearing how the EPA negatively impacts your livelihood.
    I could write a book on what the EPA has done to the trucking industry, but I'll stick to my personal experience for now. The truck I had up until recently had a major problem smoking the exhaust. In the 5 months I had it, it was going to the dealer about once a month for the same issue that they could never get fixed. Each time, it was 4-7 days in the shop, and had tried two different dealers. This was a 2014 year model, so it had warranty, but that warranty doesn't cover my down time and lost wages. That's why it wasn't in more often; I still had to make money to survive. Had I owned the truck, I'd have been out thousands more plus added expenses that wouldn't be covered by warranty. I recently left the company for other reasons, but this new "green" truck still had the same issue happening when I left and I basically gave up on it.

    What was smoking? The diesel exhaust fluid (part of the latest emissions regulations) was building up in the particulate filter (part of the prior regulations) until I got it up to full operating temperature. Then it would smoke until it all burned out, about .5 mile driving. If I would idle it while sleeping for heat/A/C, it'd smoke almost the entire time. It's not supposed to smoke at all.

    Like I said, this was just my one personal experience, but I've followed the problems with the regulations since they were implemented in 2004 when researching buying my own truck and they get worse every year. It's nothing to spend $30-40k in repairs on a $150k truck in the first year or two of ownership with these new trucks. You can't run a successful business with that kind of maintenance cost if you get one of these lemons. Right now, it's about a 50/50 shot that a new one will have major problems. Along the way people have tried fixing the problems, but the only successful ones involved flat out removing/disabling the emission controls. Only now I'm hearing reports that if a shop finds you've bypassed the emissions on your truck, they are mandated by the EPA to hold it hostage until you put it back "right" (relatively speaking, usually meaning broken) at your cost.
    NoYankees44 likes this.
    11-17-2014 10:31 PM
  21. grover5's Avatar
    And thus the hypocrisy. All pollution affects the atmosphere the same, regardless of who made it. If you are that serious about it, you wouldn't be saying countries like the U.S. have to save the planet at all costs, but give developing countries a free pass. They should be using the same cleaner processes everyone else is being told to use too.



    I could write a book on what the EPA has done to the trucking industry, but I'll stick to my personal experience for now. The truck I had up until recently had a major problem smoking the exhaust. In the 5 months I had it, it was going to the dealer about once a month for the same issue that they could never get fixed. Each time, it was 4-7 days in the shop, and had tried two different dealers. This was a 2014 year model, so it had warranty, but that warranty doesn't cover my down time and lost wages. That's why it wasn't in more often; I still had to make money to survive. Had I owned the truck, I'd have been out thousands more plus added expenses that wouldn't be covered by warranty. I recently left the company for other reasons, but this new "green" truck still had the same issue happening when I left and I basically gave up on it.

    What was smoking? The diesel exhaust fluid (part of the latest emissions regulations) was building up in the particulate filter (part of the prior regulations) until I got it up to full operating temperature. Then it would smoke until it all burned out, about .5 mile driving. If I would idle it while sleeping for heat/A/C, it'd smoke almost the entire time. It's not supposed to smoke at all.

    Like I said, this was just my one personal experience, but I've followed the problems with the regulations since they were implemented in 2004 when researching buying my own truck and they get worse every year. It's nothing to spend $30-40k in repairs on a $150k truck in the first year or two of ownership with these new trucks. You can't run a successful business with that kind of maintenance cost if you get one of these lemons. Right now, it's about a 50/50 shot that a new one will have major problems. Along the way people have tried fixing the problems, but the only successful ones involved flat out removing/disabling the emission controls. Only now I'm hearing reports that if a shop finds you've bypassed the emissions on your truck, they are mandated by the EPA to hold it hostage until you put it back "right" (relatively speaking, usually meaning broken) at your cost.
    That's not the EPA. That's the manufacturer.

    Posted via the Android Central App
    11-17-2014 10:36 PM
  22. Mooncatt's Avatar
    That's not the EPA. That's the manufacturer.
    As mandated by the EPA. These problems didn't exist prior to 2004, when the first tier of the regulations started going into effect. Before that, trucks were very reliable and it was almost impossible to do $30k in damage short of actually wrecking the truck. Plus, the EPA forced that compliance ahead of the original schedule, which severely limited the amount of R&D. The first round resulted in EGR valves, which even one of the designers said was about the worst thing you could do to a diesel engine.

    But to your point, there are now lawsuits all over the place against the engine manufacturers due to these problems, and one even stopped producing on highway engines a few years back because it was too difficult to comply and remain profitable. With the exception of Wisconsin, there are no lemon laws for heavy duty commercial vehicles, so you have no good recourse when one of these newer trucks start acting up.
    11-18-2014 06:29 AM
  23. hydrogen3's Avatar
    Even if this were REMOTELY true, why would cutting our dependency on non-renewable resources be a bad thing? You know why? Because you've been programmed to believe that it would be bad by big oil. Funny how that works, try to debunk something that would benefit our ENTIRE COUNTRY to the benefit of just a few wealthy individuals.
    I'm 100% in favor of renewable resources..
    11-18-2014 07:00 AM
  24. hydrogen3's Avatar
    It is your truth that is entertaining. But it is also sad to see someone immersed in delusion. But if you're happy and doing no real damage to yourself or others...then its just entertainment on an internet forum.

    Posted via the Android Central App
    I think the same could be said for what you consider truth...

    Can we agree to disagree?? The only viable option.. Unless you feel the need to educate me..Chuckles..
    11-18-2014 07:01 AM
  25. A895's Avatar
    And thus the hypocrisy. All pollution affects the atmosphere the same, regardless of who made it. If you are that serious about it, you wouldn't be saying countries like the U.S. have to save the planet at all costs, but give developing countries a free pass. They should be using the same cleaner processes everyone else is being told to use too.
    .
    You can't control what other countries are doing for the environment, the U.N. is trying to set guidelines and China recognizes they pollute the air like no ones business, but as it goes we have to fix whaynus happening domestically (where you have the most control and say) before you go into other countries telling them how to do things.
    11-18-2014 07:40 AM
179 ... 34567 ...

Similar Threads

  1. Moto X 2014 Bumper?
    By dsneedmd in forum Moto X (2014)
    Replies: 26
    Last Post: 12-04-2015, 08:23 AM
  2. Will my 4G EE sim card work ok in a MotoG 2014?
    By DannyHeard in forum Moto G (2014)
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 11-08-2014, 06:48 AM
  3. Is the S Galaxy Note tab 10.1 2014 a good tablet?
    By ViniciusBr in forum Samsung Galaxy Note 10.1 (2014)
    Replies: 16
    Last Post: 11-05-2014, 07:07 PM
  4. Battery issues with 2014 X?
    By douglasbnorton in forum Moto X (2014)
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 11-05-2014, 12:10 PM
  5. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 11-04-2014, 12:06 PM
LINK TO POST COPIED TO CLIPBOARD