AOC was More Accurate than Deniers Wish to Accept

[jpn]

On the contrary, indifference is part of the foundation of tolerance.

Give me a break...

 

[longview]

At the risk of being tendentious, one can certainly make educated assessments as to the veracity of the reporting. We don't live in caves, dependent upon whatever scraps of information are tossed down to us. We live in a free society with multiple viewpoints being expressed. Some sources rely on a reputation for reporting the facts as they are, and some do not.

If you want to say, for example, that climate change is a hoax, you're free to do so. However, calling the New York Times the "enemy of the people" because it reports climate change as being real is not an example of inaccurate reporting, it's an example of the media recognizing professional expertise. There's bias, but it's toward objective professional experts, which is a bias I favor. The exact same thing is true of the FBI's investigation of the Trump campaign. The bi-partisan Senate report confirms what the NYT and the Washington Post reported all along, despite shrill cries that the FBI investigation was a "witch hunt."

If you get your information from sources that claim climate change is a hoax, or that the FBI's investigation was a "witch hunt," then just recognize that you're viewing sources with heavy biases toward a political agenda, not a more objective reality.

We can attempt to get the best information possible, but as the distance grows, the number of sources diminishes.
An example might be the current controversy over a supreme court nomination to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg .
The media would have us believe that election year appointments are rare, yet they are not when
both the Presidency and the Senate is held by the same Party.
When the Presidency and the Senate are different parties, it is rare, but, we have to compare apples to apples.

 

[jpn]

We can attempt to get the best information possible, but as the distance grows, the number of sources diminishes.
An example might be the current controversy over a supreme court nomination to replace Ruth Bader Ginsburg .
The media would have us believe that election year appointments are rare, yet they are not when both the Presidency and the Senate is held by the same Party.
When the Presidency and the Senate are different parties, it is rare, but, we have to compare apples to apples.

The mainstream media that I read carefully makes that distinction. But the rarity of these appointments is not the issue that is animating the media that I read.

The issue I see media outlets reporting is the obvious hypocrisy from McConnell and the Republicans claiming that we should wait eight months for the voters to decide in 2016, but now we must scurry within seven weeks to avoid exactly that in 2020. You know, stuff like this:

Lindsey Graham: "I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination."

How many times will anyone see that quote on Fox "News?" (Answer: about as often as you see reports of the Arctic icecap melting).

The good news to me is that the Republicans are willing to force some of their fellow Senators to take a risky, high-profile vote before the election because they believe they are going lose their majority.

 

[Buzz]

One thing I enjoyed about the days DP was down was the absence of personal nastiness. I intend to try to keep that enjoyment by ignoring the nastiness now that DP is back.

Personal nastiness? What are you talking about? "Damn" wasn't personally directed toward you. It was an explanation of my strong feelings about your obviously false statement that you were not defending and/or praising Trump. And I didn't call you any names or personally insult you unless you consider stating the facts about you posting false and misleading statements is an insult. And if that is the case then maybe you should consider your own bad behavior. I know you don't care if what you say is true or not but I personally think that is morally reprehensible.

Oh... and I know for a fact I can come up with plenty of examples of you being nasty to me as well as other people around here. Like the time you called me a loser.

And one more good thing about DP being down for a couple of days... you were not able to push all your denialist lies and misinformation.



Too bad that won't continue.

I stated my reasons for those posts; I'm indifferent to your misinterpretation.

Yeah... that's the problem with you. You just don't care when people correctly point out that you are wrong. That is why you keep getting it wrong... over and over and over...

 

[Jack Hays]

Give me a break...

If there were more indifference the world would be a better place.

 

[Jack Hays]

Personal nastiness? What are you talking about? "Damn" wasn't personally directed toward you. It was an explanation of my strong feelings about your obviously false statement that you were not defending and/or praising Trump. And I didn't call you any names or personally insult you unless you consider stating the facts about you posting false and misleading statements is an insult. And if that is the case then maybe you should consider your own bad behavior. I know you don't care if what you say is true or not but I personally think that is morally reprehensible.

Oh... and I know for a fact I can come up with plenty of examples of you being nasty to me as well as other people around here. Like the time you called me a loser.

And one more good thing about DP being down for a couple of days... you were not able to push all your denialist lies and misinformation.



Too bad that won't continue.



Yeah... that's the problem with you. You just don't care when people correctly point out that you are wrong. That is why you keep getting it wrong... over and over and over...

Keep up the good work.

 

[Schism]

She was also right to refer to the concentration camps on the border as concentration camps.

AOC is going to be one badass bitch once she decides if she wants to be potus or speaker.

 

[jpn]

If there were more indifference the world would be a better place.

And politeness.

 

[Jack Hays]

And politeness.

That can be faked. Indifference is sincere.

 

[jpn]

That can be faked. Indifference is sincere.

Oh, right, indifference can't be faked. Sure. No one can post "I'm indifferent to your opinion" even when it pisses them off. Impossible.

 

[Jack Hays]

Oh, right, indifference can't be faked. Sure. No one can post "I'm indifferent to your opinion" even when it pisses them off. Impossible.

My sig line is important in this exchange.

 

[jpn]

My sig line is important in this exchange.

You're never indifferent to getting the last post, are you?

 

[Buzz]

Keep up the good work.

I will... when I can. Too bad we can't say the same about what you do around here.

 

[longview]

The mainstream media that I read carefully makes that distinction. But the rarity of these appointments is not the issue that is animating the media that I read.

The issue I see media outlets reporting is the obvious hypocrisy from McConnell and the Republicans claiming that we should wait eight months for the voters to decide in 2016, but now we must scurry within seven weeks to avoid exactly that in 2020. You know, stuff like this:

Lindsey Graham: "I want you to use my words against me. If there’s a Republican president in 2016 and a vacancy occurs in the last year of the first term, you can say Lindsey Graham said let’s let the next president, whoever it might be, make that nomination."

How many times will anyone see that quote on Fox "News?" (Answer: about as often as you see reports of the Arctic icecap melting).

The good news to me is that the Republicans are willing to force some of their fellow Senators to take a risky, high-profile vote before the election because they believe they are going lose their majority.

Again, are you really comparing apples to apples?
In 2016, the Presidency and the Senate were different parties, in 2020, they are not.
The Senate has the constitutional power to decide to vote on a nomination, or not.
When the President and the Senate are in agreement, the confirmation can happen very quickly.
On Sept, 18 1945, President Truman nominated Harold Burton for the Supreme Court,
on Sept, 19 1945, the Democrat Senate confirmed him.

 

[Bergslagstroll]

The Republican controlled both the Presidency, the Senate and the House for two years and still controls the White House and the Senate. So they could easily have disprove the urgent need for action with the federal agencies at their disposal if they had been any contrary evidences. There instead federal agencies continue to acknowledge the urgent need for action because the evidences are so overwhelming.

Effects

Takeaways Earth Will Continue to Warm and the Effects Will Be Profound Global climate change is not a future problem. Changes to Earth’s climate driven by increased human emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases are already having widespread effects on the environment: glaciers and ice sheets...

climate.nasa.gov

 

[longview]

The Republican controlled both the Presidency, the Senate and the House for two years and still controls the White House and the Senate. So they could easily have disprove the urgent need for action with the federal agencies at their disposal if they had been any contrary evidences. There instead federal agencies continue to acknowledge the urgent need for action because the evidences are so overwhelming.

Effects

Takeaways Earth Will Continue to Warm and the Effects Will Be Profound Global climate change is not a future problem. Changes to Earth’s climate driven by increased human emissions of heat-trapping greenhouse gases are already having widespread effects on the environment: glaciers and ice sheets...

climate.nasa.gov

Enough! The scientific method cannot disprove, something that is not stated!
For AGW, there is no solid statement to disprove!
Give me one solid statement about AGW, that is solid enough to challenge?
It is not the ECS, as that has a range of 1.5 to 4.5C.