Skip to main content

View Diary: Let the GOP balance the budget (123 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  What part of 'Riding the Tiger' do you not get? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    aitchdee, sydneyluv

    That's what we've been doing, and will continue to for next few decades, assuming the tiger doesn't just eat us.

    The carbon-fuel industries almost killed wind this go round, and it only survived bc the 'fiscal cliff' deal was made by BO rather than Rmoney.

    Think about that: wind.  The most benign energy source presently possible.  With literally no enemies except greedy plutocrats who pretty much model themselves after movie villains.

    Keystone fits the model perfectly: BO has not approved it.  He delayed it.  Does anyone really think a Thug - or DLC - POTUS wouldn't have approved it a year and 1/2 ago?  Political realities will likely end in it having to be approved ( with some concessions - haven't they already changed the route some?), but BO didn't create that landscape, he's only trying to manuever through it.

    And the name for those who ignore politcal reality is roadkil.  Ask Jimmy Carter's second term.

    •  Obviously, Obama has to approve shit like (0+ / 0-)

      Keystone in order to get re-elected.

      That makes sense.

      income gains to the top 1% from 2009 to 2011 were 121% of all income increases. How did that happen? Incomes to the bottom 99% fell by 0.4%

      by JesseCW on Sat Apr 06, 2013 at 06:09:13 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

    •  The problem with climate change (0+ / 0-)

      is that you can't compromise with it. You either cut CO2 emissions by about 60% or the earth will continue to get warmer, extreme weather events become more and more likely, sea level rise floods low lying real estate everywhere, agriculture fails, parts of the globe become uninhabitable.
        Delaying Keystone -tar sands development buys time, but if it's eventually developed anyway, you have the same problems only a little further in the future.

      The problem with today's Democrat Party is that it's run by people who do not understand their own base - to the extent that to stand up for Social Security is to be a DFH.
        And the Dems, instead of making a bold stand on climate change treat it as a leftist special interest issue.
         They do some good things around the margins, but they have failed on the big issues.

      •  Ur correct on climate, but that boat sailed a deca (0+ / 0-)

        de plus ago.  Simply put, the cake is baked.  Catastrophic climate change is going to happen.  The coasts are going to flood.  The grain belts are going to collapse and, if we're lucky, move north where while others will get the $ and control, we at least will have food.

        Oh, and the wars will happen.

        At best, all we can do is mitigate the worst of it.  

        Which, of course, we should try.  But we also have to be realistic about it and what we can do and can't do.  If the economics and politcs mean more carbon pollution in the short-term - and they do imo, no matter how many folks claim to be eco-voters (and claim is the right word bc history shows most will compromise when its their job or cushy livestyle on the line), then we must be creative in finding other ways to reduce same (e.g., EPAs black soot rules) short-term while nuturing and deploying non-carbon energy sources so at least there's an end to the tunnel, albeit far too late to avoid much of the damage.

        I've been advocating on carbon-climate change since 1980 (yes, 1980).  Its one of the major reasons I despaired during the Great Theft of 2000.  I am coming to the conclusion that politcs simply is not able to deal with it.  What it takes - and what has/is happening - is a multigenerational change in atitudes about the signifcance and fragility of the Earth.  Call it The Revenge of the Big Blue Marble.  (E.g., very few people over 60 seem capable of comprehending that us little human can so f-- up the Earth, but the number who can grows with each decade younger.)

        •  humanity also forgets (0+ / 0-)

          that life got as comfortable for us in the so-called First World only over say the last 100 or so years.  They forget what life could easily be like, even though many in the Third World could certainly remind us if we were paying attention.

          How is taking a hundred dollars worth of food from hungry kids or from old poor sick people equal to taking a hundred dollars from billionaires? -- howabout, 19 Dec 2012

          by billlaurelMD on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 10:27:32 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  sigh ... Maybe it doesn't matter any more .... (0+ / 0-)

        please don't say DemocRAT when it's Democratic.  One of my BIG pet peeves.  And you're bringing in Right-Wing Framing when you say it.

        On second thought, maybe we SHOULD call the particular wing of the party you describe as DemocRAT, after all. :-(

        How is taking a hundred dollars worth of food from hungry kids or from old poor sick people equal to taking a hundred dollars from billionaires? -- howabout, 19 Dec 2012

        by billlaurelMD on Sun Apr 07, 2013 at 10:25:39 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site