Rep. Lynn Woolsey answered that she could accept wind power "if it's not harmful to the environment" and it's visually acceptable. Remember the circus that followed plans to build a wind farm in Nantucket Sound, with the otherwise-environmentally sensitive Kennedy family in opposition? The arguments that drilling critics have used -- as in, drilling is bad for tourism -- may well be used against wind turbines.
Rep. Lynn Woolsey answered that she could accept wind power "if it's not harmful to the environment" and it's visually acceptable. Remember the circus that followed plans to build a wind farm in Nantucket Sound, with the otherwise-environmentally sensitive Kennedy family in opposition? The arguments that drilling critics have used -- as in, drilling is bad for tourism -- may well be used against wind turbines.
what the hell? We can't drill, we can't have wind if it's not pretty? What a bunch of liberal bull shit! We need energy, dammit!
Well i'm not a liberal or a conservative. I find that i vary from topic to topic on my designation. On this however i am liberal as hell. I live in Louisiana, and chose to live here because i loved the natural mysterious beauty of the swamps, and California, where i was born and raised was quickly becoming one big fooking suburb. Now the same thing is happening to Louisiana, and a lot of the swamps down here have a distinctly petrolfarty stench to them.
I've watched the big oil and chemical companies rape the landscapes, wipe out various flora and fauna species and foul the air. In return they give us "energy", disposable products that inundate us with megatons of trash, air fresheners, plastic turf, bumper to bumper traffic, etc. Yeah, you conservatives really put the liberals to shame. My fooking congratulations.
Rep. Lynn Woolsey answered that she could accept wind power "if it's not harmful to the environment" and it's visually acceptable. Remember the circus that followed plans to build a wind farm in Nantucket Sound, with the otherwise-environmentally sensitive Kennedy family in opposition? The arguments that drilling critics have used -- as in, drilling is bad for tourism -- may well be used against wind turbines.
what the hell? We can't drill, we can't have wind if it's not pretty? What a bunch of liberal bull shit! We need energy, dammit!
Well i'm not a liberal or a conservative. I find that i vary from topic to topic on my designation. On this however i am liberal as hell. I live in Louisiana, and chose to live here because i loved the natural mysterious beauty of the swamps, and California, where i was born and raised was quickly becoming one big fooking suburb. Now the same thing is happening to Louisiana, and a lot of the swamps down here have a distinctly petrolfarty stench to them.
I've watched the big oil and chemical companies rape the landscapes, wipe out various flora and fauna species and foul the air. In return they give us "energy", disposable products that inundate us with megatons of trash, air fresheners, plastic turf, bumper to bumper traffic, etc. Yeah, you conservatives really put the liberals to shame. My fooking congratulations.
Honibaz
I agree. I think alternative energy is key. I was referring to Woolsey's opposition to wind energy, because of the damage. to "aesthetics!" Where would she like to live... in a cave?
Rep. Lynn Woolsey answered that she could accept wind power "if it's not harmful to the environment" and it's visually acceptable. Remember the circus that followed plans to build a wind farm in Nantucket Sound, with the otherwise-environmentally sensitive Kennedy family in opposition? The arguments that drilling critics have used -- as in, drilling is bad for tourism -- may well be used against wind turbines.
what the hell? We can't drill, we can't have wind if it's not pretty? What a bunch of liberal bull shit! We need energy, dammit!
Well i'm not a liberal or a conservative. I find that i vary from topic to topic on my designation. On this however i am liberal as hell. I live in Louisiana, and chose to live here because i loved the natural mysterious beauty of the swamps, and California, where i was born and raised was quickly becoming one big fooking suburb. Now the same thing is happening to Louisiana, and a lot of the swamps down here have a distinctly petrolfarty stench to them.
I've watched the big oil and chemical companies rape the landscapes, wipe out various flora and fauna species and foul the air. In return they give us "energy", disposable products that inundate us with megatons of trash, air fresheners, plastic turf, bumper to bumper traffic, etc. Yeah, you conservatives really put the liberals to shame. My fooking congratulations.
Honibaz
I agree. I think alternative energy is key. I was referring to Woolsey's opposition to wind energy, because of the damage. to "aesthetics!" Where would she like to live... in a cave?
OKay, so you only take issue with this one Liberal and not all Liberals as your thread title might suggest. You should see if a mod can fix that, I find it insulting.
Very well said BK, anything that gets us away from Petrolium altogether is okay with me. No one takes into account all of the plastics that are fouling every corner of the planet. Great Pacific Garbage Patch anyone? Hell, Maryland is considering a tax on those plastic bags you get from the grocery store (5c a piece) because of the state of the Annacostia River (disgusting). Guess whos opposing the measure? The Liberals, worried about the price of grocerys for the poor. My point: We need new political demarcations, the terms Liberal and Democrat have lost there significance in todays vernacular.
Rep. Lynn Woolsey answered that she could accept wind power "if it's not harmful to the environment" and it's visually acceptable. Remember the circus that followed plans to build a wind farm in Nantucket Sound, with the otherwise-environmentally sensitive Kennedy family in opposition? The arguments that drilling critics have used -- as in, drilling is bad for tourism -- may well be used against wind turbines.
what the hell? We can't drill, we can't have wind if it's not pretty? What a bunch of liberal bull shit! We need energy, dammit!
Well i'm not a liberal or a conservative. I find that i vary from topic to topic on my designation. On this however i am liberal as hell. I live in Louisiana, and chose to live here because i loved the natural mysterious beauty of the swamps, and California, where i was born and raised was quickly becoming one big fooking suburb. Now the same thing is happening to Louisiana, and a lot of the swamps down here have a distinctly petrolfarty stench to them.
I've watched the big oil and chemical companies rape the landscapes, wipe out various flora and fauna species and foul the air. In return they give us "energy", disposable products that inundate us with megatons of trash, air fresheners, plastic turf, bumper to bumper traffic, etc. Yeah, you conservatives really put the liberals to shame. My fooking congratulations.
Honibaz
I agree. I think alternative energy is key. I was referring to Woolsey's opposition to wind energy, because of the damage. to "aesthetics!" Where would she like to live... in a cave?
Only if the paintings are nice enough.
saxitoxin wrote:Your position is more complex than the federal tax code. As soon as I think I understand it, I find another index of cross-references, exceptions and amendments I have to apply.
Timminz wrote:Yo mama is so classless, she could be a Marxist utopia.
As far as aesthetic priorities, i really don't think it's too much to ask to avoid marring a beautiful desert landscape with a little concession to aesthetics. These megacorporations can afford a few more dollars to make their windmills a little more pleasing to the eye. What i don't understand is how working class folks take the side of these big corpos - they rape our lands, pay pissant wages, build their factories in third world countries and jack up our unemployment, and the conservative working man struggling to make ends meet still believes their rhetoric on how "what's good for this company is good for Amurka. Brilliant!
Take global warming for instance. I don't know a damn thing about it really, as i'm not a scientist and therefore can't really determine which side is telling the truth and which side is shovelling shit. So i look at motives - what are the liberals' motives for saying that global warming is a fact? Hmm, can't see one actually. Now what are the motives of the big corporations to say that it's bullshit? Well, for one thing it'll cost them a shitload of money to adjust their petrochemical refineries and factories so that they don't burn off the ozone layer. But hey, who am i do disagree with a genius like Rush Limbaugh?
b.k. barunt wrote:As far as aesthetic priorities, i really don't think it's too much to ask to avoid marring a beautiful desert landscape with a little concession to aesthetics. These megacorporations can afford a few more dollars to make their windmills a little more pleasing to the eye. What i don't understand is how working class folks take the side of these big corpos - they rape our lands, pay pissant wages, build their factories in third world countries and jack up our unemployment, and the conservative working man struggling to make ends meet still believes their rhetoric on how "what's good for this company is good for Amurka. Brilliant!
Take global warming for instance. I don't know a damn thing about it really, as i'm not a scientist and therefore can't really determine which side is telling the truth and which side is shovelling shit. So i look at motives - what are the liberals' motives for saying that global warming is a fact? Hmm, can't see one actually. Now what are the motives of the big corporations to say that it's bullshit? Well, for one thing it'll cost them a shitload of money to adjust their petrochemical refineries and factories so that they don't burn off the ozone layer. But hey, who am i do disagree with a genius like Rush Limbaugh?
Honibaz
Honibaz
You can look at the proposed "cap and trade" legislation for a liberal motivation... It will generate more bureaucracy and tax revenue for the political elite and the Illuminati. I would much rather get rid of coal, its filthy... outfit homes to be solar energy sufficient, maybe use horses more... magnetic rail for long distances... I love all of these ideas. But when you plug the fucking union into the equation, the the labor involved with these kinds of projects makes them silly expensive.
captain.crazy wrote:You can look at the proposed "cap and trade" legislation for a liberal motivation... It will generate more bureaucracy and tax revenue for the political elite and the Illuminati. I would much rather get rid of coal, its filthy... outfit homes to be solar energy sufficient, maybe use horses more... magnetic rail for long distances... I love all of these ideas. But when you plug the fucking union into the equation, the the labor involved with these kinds of projects makes them silly expensive.
Is that your way of volunteering to help build them?
captain.crazy wrote:You can look at the proposed "cap and trade" legislation for a liberal motivation... It will generate more bureaucracy and tax revenue for the political elite and the Illuminati. I would much rather get rid of coal, its filthy... outfit homes to be solar energy sufficient, maybe use horses more... magnetic rail for long distances... I love all of these ideas. But when you plug the fucking union into the equation, the the labor involved with these kinds of projects makes them silly expensive.
Is that your way of volunteering to help build them?
no... but I would gladly bull whip you while you do the hard labor...
captain.crazy wrote:You can look at the proposed "cap and trade" legislation for a liberal motivation... It will generate more bureaucracy and tax revenue for the political elite and the Illuminati. I would much rather get rid of coal, its filthy... outfit homes to be solar energy sufficient, maybe use horses more... magnetic rail for long distances... I love all of these ideas. But when you plug the fucking union into the equation, the the labor involved with these kinds of projects makes them silly expensive.
Is that your way of volunteering to help build them?
no... but I would gladly bull whip you while you do the hard labor...
captain.crazy wrote:You can look at the proposed "cap and trade" legislation for a liberal motivation... It will generate more bureaucracy and tax revenue for the political elite and the Illuminati. I would much rather get rid of coal, its filthy... outfit homes to be solar energy sufficient, maybe use horses more... magnetic rail for long distances... I love all of these ideas. But when you plug the fucking union into the equation, the the labor involved with these kinds of projects makes them silly expensive.
Is that your way of volunteering to help build them?
no... but I would gladly bull whip you while you do the hard labor...
Ooh. Keep talking dirty to me.
lol... dammit! I want to like you but you gave pumpdave my link. Not cool!
b.k. barunt wrote:As far as aesthetic priorities, i really don't think it's too much to ask to avoid marring a beautiful desert landscape with a little concession to aesthetics. These megacorporations can afford a few more dollars to make their windmills a little more pleasing to the eye. What i don't understand is how working class folks take the side of these big corpos - they rape our lands, pay pissant wages, build their factories in third world countries and jack up our unemployment, and the conservative working man struggling to make ends meet still believes their rhetoric on how "what's good for this company is good for Amurka. Brilliant!
Take global warming for instance. I don't know a damn thing about it really, as i'm not a scientist and therefore can't really determine which side is telling the truth and which side is shovelling shit. So i look at motives - what are the liberals' motives for saying that global warming is a fact? Hmm, can't see one actually. Now what are the motives of the big corporations to say that it's bullshit? Well, for one thing it'll cost them a shitload of money to adjust their petrochemical refineries and factories so that they don't burn off the ozone layer. But hey, who am i do disagree with a genius like Rush Limbaugh?
jonesthecurl wrote:I like wind power generators. I think they're pretty.
I used to too... then they built 68 of them a few miles from my house. Ellll.......... at night the sky is lit with red lights... and during the day the veiw to the north just looks stupid. I think they did ruin the view out here in the country.
... Major Media, unfortunately, doesn't speak on the topic.
... Care to refute the claims and financial connections asserted therein?
... No?
...
I didn't bother to read the article. At least, not all of it. I got to about halfway through the second paragraph when I realized that this article was so ridiculously biased that I really couldn't trust anything it said. To stoop to petty insults, attacking people who have opposing view points is just petty and childish. That is hardly a credible source, by any stretch of the word.
In heaven... Everything is fine, in heaven... Everything is fine, in heaven... Everything is fine... You got your things, and I've got mine.
Don't worry, I will make one titled Republicans suck. I am bound to read an article in which Eric Kantor makes me mad. I am sure that all the liberals here will be behind that one 100 percent!
b.k. barunt wrote:As far as aesthetic priorities, i really don't think it's too much to ask to avoid marring a beautiful desert landscape with a little concession to aesthetics. These megacorporations can afford a few more dollars to make their windmills a little more pleasing to the eye. What i don't understand is how working class folks take the side of these big corpos - they rape our lands, pay pissant wages, build their factories in third world countries and jack up our unemployment, and the conservative working man struggling to make ends meet still believes their rhetoric on how "what's good for this company is good for Amurka. Brilliant!
Take global warming for instance. I don't know a damn thing about it really, as i'm not a scientist and therefore can't really determine which side is telling the truth and which side is shovelling shit. So i look at motives - what are the liberals' motives for saying that global warming is a fact? Hmm, can't see one actually. Now what are the motives of the big corporations to say that it's bullshit? Well, for one thing it'll cost them a shitload of money to adjust their petrochemical refineries and factories so that they don't burn off the ozone layer. But hey, who am i do disagree with a genius like Rush Limbaugh?
What is most amusing is that anybody would imagine Al Gore is anything but a figure of fun , the article is utterly irrelevant to environmental concerns as a whole, thats even if you could believe it in the first place.
