|
Post by papercrafteradvocate on Dec 16, 2018 16:50:41 GMT
Texas rulingI wondered how the individual mandate could be considered unconstitutional and because it was the entire law was overturned. New York Time - Opinion. Jonathan Adler & Abbe R. Gluck ” What the Lawless Obamacare Ruling Means” “It’s not based on a solid legal argument. It’s an exercise in raw judicial power. In a shocking legal ruling, a federal judge in Texas wiped Obamacare off the books Friday night. The decision, issued after business hours on the eve of the deadline to enroll for health insurance for 2019, focuses on the so-called individual mandate. Yet it purports to declare the entire law unconstitutional — everything from the Medicaid expansion, the ban on pre-existing conditions, Medicare and pharmaceutical reforms to much, much more. A ruling this consequential had better be based on rock-solid legal argument. Instead, the opinion by Judge Reed O’Connor is an exercise of raw judicial power, unmoored from the relevant doctrines concerning when judges may strike down a whole law because of a single alleged legal infirmity buried within. We were on opposing sides of the 2012 and 2015 Supreme Court challenges to the Affordable Care Act, and we have different views of the merits of the act itself. But as experts in the field of statutory law, we agree that this decision makes a mockery of the rule of law and basic principles of democracy — especially Congress’s constitutional power to amend its own statutes and do so in accord with its own internal rules. The individual mandate is the law’s controversial requirement that all Americans maintain qualifying health insurance coverage or pay a penalty. In 2012, the Supreme Court upheld this penalty as an exercise of Congress’s taxing power. In 2017, unable to get the votes to repeal the entire law, Congress just zeroed out the penalty. In this case, Texas and 19 other states argue that with zero penalty, the mandate lacks a constitutional basis because it will no longer be enforced like a tax. If that were all there was, the case would have little consequence because starting in 2019, the mandate is unenforceable. But audaciously, the states argued — and Judge O’Connor agreed — that the rest of Obamacare must fall, too. They claim that the mandate is so central to the A.C.A. that nothing else in it can operate without it. That’s not how the relevant law works. An established legal principle called “severability” is triggered when a court must consider what happens to a statute when one part of it is struck down. The principle presumes that, out of respect for the separation of powers, courts will leave the rest of the statute standing unless Congress makes clear it did not intend for the law to exist without the challenged provision. This is not a liberal principle or a conservative principle. It is an uncontroversial rule that every Supreme Court justice in modern history has applied. Sometimes severability cases are difficult because it is hard to guess how much importance Congress attributed to one provision, especially in a lengthy law like the Affordable Care Act. But this is an easy case: It was Congress, not a court, that eliminated the mandate penalty and left the rest of the statute in place. How can a court conclude that Congress never intended the rest of the statute to exist without an operational mandate, when it was the 2017 Congress itself that decided it was fine to eliminate the penalty and leave the rest of the law intact? The 55-page opinion devotes just two pages to the intention of the 2017 Congress. Instead, it relies on the perspective of the 2010 Congress that enacted the law, and two Supreme Court cases that were charged with asking questions about that 2010 Congress’s intent. While the dozens of pages rehearsing those old viewpoints may look superficially sound, that part of the opinion is smoke and mirrors, because the 2010 Congress’s intention is not relevant to this case — the 2010 law is no longer what is at issue. Congress is allowed to amend its own law, and the Constitution does not permit any court to undermine that power. Still, Judge O’Connor wrote that we cannot divine the intent of the 2017 Congress because Congress didn’t have the votes to repeal the entire law but wished it could. That’s ridiculous. Congressional intent is all about the votes. One would not say Congress wished it could repeal the Civil Rights Act if only a minority of Congress supported such a move. It is conservative judicial doctrine 101, as repeatedly emphasized by Justice Antonin Scalia, that the best way to understand congressional intent is to look at the text Congress was able to get through the legislative process. Instead, Judge O’Connor goes down a rabbit hole, hypothesizing whether the 2010 Congress would have enacted the entire law without the mandate and whether the law can function without it. What findings Congress made in 2010 are irrelevant to the interpretation of this later legislative act. Regardless, Congress’s own act of 2017 makes clear Congress thinks the law works without an operational mandate. To believe otherwise is to assume Congress enacts unworkable laws and that is not what courts are allowed to presume. Judge O’Connor’s claim to the contrary is the equivalent of saying that your 2017 tax cut isn’t valid because the 2010 Congress also enacted a tax bill, and wouldn’t have included your tax cut there. What happens next? The health law is likely to continue in place while the case moves to the higher courts. California, the leader of a group of states that stepped in to defend the law because the Justice Department refused to do so, will almost certainly go to the Fifth Circuit — the federal appellate court that presides over Texas — to have the effects of the decision paused and the case reviewed. The House of Representatives will also likely join the lawsuit once the Democrats take control. If the Fifth Circuit reverses Judge O’Connor, we think it unlikely the Supreme Court will take the case. If the Fifth Circuit upholds the ruling, we are skeptical a majority of the court would sustain this weak analysis. Chief Justice John Roberts is sensitive to allowing the court to be an instrument of politics, particularly when doing so violates separation of powers. Justice Brett Kavanaugh is an expert on statutory interpretation who has previously said that courts should “sever an offending provision from the statute to the narrowest extent possible unless Congress has indicated otherwise in the text of the statute.” To do otherwise would be for the court to substitute its own judgment for Congress’s. Justice Clarence Thomas has opined that the kind of hypothesizing analysis on which Judge O’Connor relied is inappropriate: Congress’s intentions “do not count,” he wrote earlier this year, unless they are “enshrined” in a text that made it through the “constitutional processes of bicameralism and presentment” — as everyone agrees the 2017 tax bill did. Friday was another sad day for the rule of law — the deployment of judicial opinions employing questionable legal arguments to support a political agenda. This is not how judges are supposed to act. Reasonable people may disagree on whether the health law represented the best way to reform America’s health care system, and reasonable people may disagree on whether it should be replaced with a different approach. Yet reasonable people should understand such choices are left to Congress, not to the courts. Me thinks this judge is looking for trump to appoint him to the Supreme Court or a cabinet position!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2018 16:56:14 GMT
linkFor some humor from Newsweek.. ” PARROT USES ALEXA TO ORDER WATERMELON, LIGHTBULBS WHILE OWNER IS OUT”“A peckish parrot has been caught ordering strawberries, a watermelon and even a water boiler through his foster owner’s electronic personal assistant. Rocco, an African Grey, requested the items through an Alexa device while his minder was out of the home. Luckily, due to a parental lock, none of his attempted purchases went through. Rocco, who lives with Marion Wischnewski in Berkshire, U.K., has attempted to order everything from kites and lightbulbs through Alexa since moving to her home. He also gets the device to tell him jokes and play his favorite tunes. I’ve come home before and he has romantic music playing,” Wischnewski told The Times of London. “He loves to dance and has the sweetest personality.” 😀
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2018 17:01:08 GMT
CNN..
”“Clearly, this was not a good week for President Trump nor his campaign organization and these allegations are concerning. But we need to wait until we have the entire picture,” GOP Sen. Susan Collins says. #CNNSOTU cnn.it/2Gh9yFg”
Does anyone take anything Susan Collins has to say seriously anymore?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2018 17:06:55 GMT
Meet the Press...
”Legislate, don't investigate," in order to get another shot at keeping control of the House, @royblunt says on his advice to his colleagues across the aisle in the House. #MTP”
Psst.. I think you find that the Democrats in the House can do both. And oversight is a big part of the job of Congress that dies after Benghazi.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Dec 16, 2018 17:13:53 GMT
So they let this guy out. Compare how Stephen Miller looks to the guys casted as Nazi’s in the movies. I think you will see a striking resemblance. Especially to the creepier ones. He is a tan shirt Jew! ”Though the investigation comes with a hefty price tag, it may have actually paid for its own investigation, with its probe leading to monetary estimated gains of up to $48 million for the government through the tax evasion the investigation has revealed. I have said all along that Manafort has paid for the investigation! Recovery of $$$$ is larger than I had thought, and seems to be going up!
|
|
|
Post by quinlove on Dec 16, 2018 17:17:06 GMT
"Sometimes I wish I had never been president." Ok there is one thing good about Trump being president. SNL is fun again.
|
|
Just T
Drama Llama
Posts: 5,779
Jun 26, 2014 1:20:09 GMT
|
Post by Just T on Dec 16, 2018 17:18:12 GMT
So they let this guy out. Compare how Stephen Miller looks to the guys casted as Nazi’s in the movies. I think you will see a striking resemblance. Especially to the creepier ones. He is a tan shirt Jew! ”Though the investigation comes with a hefty price tag, it may have actually paid for its own investigation, with its probe leading to monetary estimated gains of up to $48 million for the government through the tax evasion the investigation has revealed. I have said all along that Manafort has paid for the investigation! Recovery of $$$$ is larger than I had thought, and seems to be going up! And just imagine what the recovered $$$$ will be if they end up getting Trump on tax evasion. How ironic that will be if Trump money ends up paying for/making money on the investigation. That will be some karma!
|
|
|
Post by annabella on Dec 16, 2018 17:26:18 GMT
VideoNavarro eats watching Oval Office clash
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2018 18:00:26 GMT
Okay, this has nothing to do with Trump, but it kind of does. It's no secret my father is a true blue, to the end Trump supporter. He avidly posts pro-Trump and Libtard content on his social media. I finally unfriended him after he was all about Kavanaugh when he knew I'd been sexually molested by a family friend. Anyway, he thinks because my middle sis and I are not Trump supporters that we've lost our religion and are basically evil. So for Christmas he got us and all our family members new Bibles and Bible encyclopedias! My sister is pissed. I wouldn't think anything of it if it were from most other people but everything he says or does is meant to send a message and make no mistake, his message isn't to share the love of Christ. First of all, I'm SO sorry! That's horrible!! I know we've discussed the similarities with my DH (who has been a lifelong liberal and suddenly fell for the Trump faux-successful-$hit and then voted for him!!). DH also TRIED to defend Kavanaugh while we were watching Dr. Ford's testimony, and DH knows very well about my brutal rape. I felt very much unheard and dismissed when he & I watched this heart-wrenching testimony (in all of Dr. Ford's grace!) and then DH mentioned that he thought this was somehow a "set-up" and not real.............. Ugh!!
While he began admitting that Trump was nuts less than 1 year into his presidency, I still can't get him to outline why HRC would be so much worse of a President. I just don't get the subliminal hatred that was spread around about her...........
That being said, DH thinks that I focus on politics way too much and I'm too angry about it (nothing about my Christianity---and he KNOWS that Trump has no morals or religion). I'm focused on it because this is HISTORY in the making and I am truly worried about our Country. I'd love to see this wrap up and have honesty win. I won't stop listening/reading about it until then (and personally I'd LOVE to see Trump utterly humiliated and outed for ALL of dishonest life).
I'd send the bible back to your Dad with a note that says, "You apparently need this MUCH more than I do. God bless!"
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2018 18:17:43 GMT
I take the weather is stopping trump from golfing.
”The Democrats policy of Child Seperation on the Border during the Obama Administration was far worse than the way we handle it now. Remember the 2014 picture of children in cages - the Obama years. However, if you don’t separate, FAR more people will come. Smugglers use the kids!”
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2018 18:19:45 GMT
Face the Nation... ”@margbrennan asked White House Senior Advisor Stephen Miller if there will be a partial government shutdown over a border wall. Miller says “If it comes to it, absolutely.” So they let this guy out. Compare how Stephen Miller looks to the guys casted as Nazi’s in the movies. I think you will see a striking resemblance. Especially to the creepier ones. ITA. I'd go further to say that Stephen Miller looks like a cross between a Nazi and an alien. He freaks me out. So does Carter Page. I constantly tell DH that the 'Trumplickers' (my term) either look like Nazis or literal a$$holes. They're all very "off" in 1 way or another.
|
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,790
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Dec 16, 2018 18:28:07 GMT
First of all, I'm SO sorry! That's horrible!! I know we've discussed the similarities with my DH (who has been a lifelong liberal and suddenly fell for the Trump faux-successful-$hit and then voted for him!!). DH also TRIED to defend Kavanaugh while we were watching Dr. Ford's testimony, and DH knows very well about my brutal rape. I felt very much unheard and dismissed when he & I watched this heart-wrenching testimony (in all of Dr. Ford's grace!) and then DH mentioned that he thought this was somehow a "set-up" and not real.............. Ugh!!
While he began admitting that Trump was nuts less than 1 year into his presidency, I still can't get him to outline why HRC would be so much worse of a President. I just don't get the subliminal hatred that was spread around about her...........
That being said, DH thinks that I focus on politics way too much and I'm too angry about it (nothing about my Christianity---and he KNOWS that Trump has no morals or religion). I'm focused on it because this is HISTORY in the making and I am truly worried about our Country. I'd love to see this wrap up and have honesty win. I won't stop listening/reading about it until then (and personally I'd LOVE to see Trump utterly humiliated and outed for ALL of dishonest life).
Assuming your husband is, not being a straight white male, you probably do focus on politics than him because you can relate to those being victimized more. You feel "the pain"- he obviously doesn't so much. His life, being who he is, probably isn't changed or threatened much in his mind. Nothing to fret about. So many judge and say what a victim would, wouldn't or should have done yet they have no frame of reference to draw from. They don't get it or don't care to and get it wrong. Even if unfair treatment etc doesn't relate directly to you, caring for others is a good thing. It's called empathy. Hugs to you. We need more caring people focusing on the insanity that is this administration. #resist ETA @bergdorfblonde just wanted to come back and make clear if it wasn't... I was not trying to target your hubby as an individual. you are with him for a reason and I am sure he could be a fantastic person. My point was trying to be that those (not just your hubby) not affected from by old-white-men-supremacy-in-office may not see the need for a correction as the change is not so evident to them from their personal perspective.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Dec 16, 2018 18:28:26 GMT
So do you dt!! You use them for your politics to rile up your base!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2018 18:31:44 GMT
This from trump... ”A REAL scandal is the one sided coverage, hour by hour, of networks like NBC & Democrat spin machines like Saturday Night Live. It is all nothing less than unfair news coverage and Dem commercials. Should be tested in courts, can’t be legal? Only defame & belittle! Collusion?” Prompted this truth from West Wing Reports.. ”SNL made fun of: Nixon Ford Carter Reagan Bush HW Clinton Bush W Obama and now Trump. But only Trump suggests it's illegal. Every president swears to "preserve, protect and defend" the Constitution - @realdonaldtrump reveals, again, his deep insecurity and sense of inferiority” And didn’t Bush HW become friends with the guy who played him on SNL? Dana Carvey played Bush on SNL and Bush took it well and did befriend him. Chevy Chase played Ford and Ford nodded to him in acceptance quite a few times. ONLY Trump is paranoid enough to think that everything is about him and against ONLY him. He can't take a joke. Probably stems back to his parents being hard on him.
|
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,790
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Dec 16, 2018 18:32:06 GMT
So do you dt!! You use them for your politics to rile up your base! exactly. or to get down to his level, so he understands... **sticks out tongue*** "takes one to know one! nah, nah, nah, nah, nah." he has the emotional maturity and intellect of a not-so bright 12 year old bully.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2018 18:40:59 GMT
First of all, I'm SO sorry! That's horrible!! I know we've discussed the similarities with my DH (who has been a lifelong liberal and suddenly fell for the Trump faux-successful-$hit and then voted for him!!). DH also TRIED to defend Kavanaugh while we were watching Dr. Ford's testimony, and DH knows very well about my brutal rape. I felt very much unheard and dismissed when he & I watched this heart-wrenching testimony (in all of Dr. Ford's grace!) and then DH mentioned that he thought this was somehow a "set-up" and not real.............. Ugh!!
While he began admitting that Trump was nuts less than 1 year into his presidency, I still can't get him to outline why HRC would be so much worse of a President. I just don't get the subliminal hatred that was spread around about her...........
That being said, DH thinks that I focus on politics way too much and I'm too angry about it (nothing about my Christianity---and he KNOWS that Trump has no morals or religion). I'm focused on it because this is HISTORY in the making and I am truly worried about our Country. I'd love to see this wrap up and have honesty win. I won't stop listening/reading about it until then (and personally I'd LOVE to see Trump utterly humiliated and outed for ALL of dishonest life).
Assuming your husband is, not being a straight white male, you probably do focus on politics than him because you can relate to those being victimized more. You feel "the pain"- he obviously doesn't so much. His life, being who he is, probably isn't changed or threatened much in his mind. Nothing to fret about. So many judge and say what a victim would, wouldn't or should have done yet they have no frame of reference to draw from. They don't get it or don't care to and get it wrong. Even if unfair treatment etc doesn't relate directly to you, caring for others is a good thing. It's called empathy. Hugs to you. We need more caring people focusing on the insanity that is this administration. #resist Thank you. He is extremely compassionate and caring. Something in him changed in the past 3 years to the point where he isn't sure what to believe (about politics) and he's being bombarded with too much information. Unfortunately he fell for Trump's crap and still does believe some of the $hit that he hears from conservative sources. It irks me to no end.
Just to add: DH took my 2 adult children in to live with us while we were still newly married. He helped my son with an n/a program and helped shape him into the man that he is now. He's got sheer and utter love in his heart. He's supported me through a rough medical year and always wants what's best for me.
That being said, I truly think that he's able to shut off reality or clear-headed thinking when it comes to this administration. It might all just be too much for him. Understandable since I've been through my rough year and he's going through his cancer ordeal. In the past he's taught classes (in the early 1980's) in college on the Liberation of Women, and he's always been a supporter of women and people in general, so this is all new and surprising to me.
I do #resist and insist on my point being heard but I keep it in limited doses so that I don't overwhelm him. It's frustrating though that the conservative news sources almost seem to prey on the weak-minded or elderly to confuse them. Makes me angry.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Dec 16, 2018 18:51:02 GMT
It's frustrating though that the conservative news sources almost seem to prey on the weak-minded or elderly to confuse them. Makes me angry. So very true. They do it well!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2018 21:35:42 GMT
It’s clear someone isn’t busy today.
trump..
”Required television watching is last weeks @marthamaccallum interview with the wonderful wife of Rod Blagojevich and the @trish_regan interview with a Jerome Corsi. If that doesn’t tell you something about what has been going on in our Country, nothing will. Very sad!”
Required television watching”. From this guy?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2018 21:38:46 GMT
And he continues..
”“It looks here as though General Flynn’s defenses are incidental to something larger which is for the prosecution to figure out if it can find a path to Donald Trump without quite knowing what that crime might be. It stops looking like prosecution and more looking like......”
“a persecution of the President.” Daniel Henninger, The Wall Street Journal. Thank you, people are starting to see and understand what this Witch Hunt is all about. Jeff Sessions should be ashamed of himself for allowing this total HOAX to get started in the first place!”
”The Russian Witch Hunt Hoax, started as the “insurance policy” long before I even got elected, is very bad for our Country. They are Entrapping people for misstatements, lies or unrelated things that took place many years ago. Nothing to do with Collusion. A Democrat Scam!”
So now it’s a “witch hunt hoax”.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Dec 16, 2018 22:07:34 GMT
How can they all believe him?!?!?!?!?!?!
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2018 22:48:45 GMT
linkThis exactly why you don’t vote for Republicans.. “GOP Kills Bill That Would Extend Agent Orange Benefits To US Navy Vietnam Vets” “Sen. Mike Enzi of Wyoming—who voted for tax cuts—objected to the bill on the basis it would increase deficit spending.” Two Republican senators killed a bill on Monday that would provide benefits to American veterans who served in the U.S. Navy during the Vietnam War and now suffer the effects of Agent Orange. The reason? Extending benefits to those veterans would constitute deficit spending.
The Blue Water Navy Vietnam Veterans Act would extend eligibility for disability compensation and health care to “Blue Water” Navy veterans – servicemembers who were aboard aircraft carriers, cruisers, destroyers and other ships, some of whom have fought for years to prove they were exposed to Agent Orange. The dioxin-laden herbicide has been found to cause respiratory cancers, Parkinson’s disease and heart disease, as well as other conditions. The House voted 382-0 in favor of the legislation in June. Since then, it’s been stuck in the Senate. VA Secretary Robert Wilkie voiced his opposition to the bill in September, citing cost concerns and insufficient scientific evidence. He urged lawmakers to hold off until a new study is released in 2019. Senator Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) brought the bill to the floor on Monday night asking for unanimous consent to pass the measure, which would expedite the bill but can be derailed by just one no vote. Senate Budget Committee Chairman Mike Enzi (R-WY) provided the only objection necessary to kill the bill. On this bill, many of us have been made aware of the potential cost growth and the budgetary and operational pressures that would happen at the VA,” he said. “They’re having a lot of problems, anyway.” Enzi said he wanted more details about how many veterans would be made eligible for benefits under the legislation and how much it would cost. “There’s clearly more work to do just on figuring out the spending and administration of this and the deficit impacts this bill will have,” Enzi said on the Senate floor. The Congressional Budget Office estimated the bill would cost $1.1 billion over the next decade — a number VA officials say could balloon to billions of dollars more. The measure included a new fee for VA home loans in an effort to mitigate the costs, Stars and Stripes reported. Rep. Tim Walz, D-Minn., later criticized Enzi’s objection, arguing the same senator voted in favor of the GOP tax cuts estimated to increase the national deficit. “I must say that it is a bit disheartening to see a bill that was passed unanimously by the House blocked by just a handful of senators over supposed fiscal concerns when those same senators voted to add trillions of dollars to the deficit last year to score a political win on the back of American taxpayers,” Walz said in a statement. Senator Mike Lee (R-UT) also objected to the bill, saying he preferred to wait for the VA’s promised study in 2019.” And in the meantime?
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2018 23:49:35 GMT
Chris Redd....
“Y’all gotta give Trump Credit, man. The dude is president AND watches TV like the unemployed friend that calls you while you’re at work like “what you doing?” And then manages to write a mystery novel worth of tweets. The mystery being mostly “what word was he trying to spell?”
😀
|
|
moodyblue
Drama Llama
Posts: 6,246
Location: Western Illinois
Site Supporter
Jun 26, 2014 21:07:23 GMT
|
Post by moodyblue on Dec 17, 2018 0:59:54 GMT
So do you dt!! You use them for your politics to rile up your base! exactly. or to get down to his level, so he understands... **sticks out tongue*** "takes one to know one! nah, nah, nah, nah, nah." he has the emotional maturity and intellect of a not-so bright 12 year old bully. My husband has repeatedly said that Trump is a 12-year-old bully. I agree.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Dec 17, 2018 2:39:47 GMT
Out of the mouths of babes!! Teen tells climate negotiators they aren't mature enoughBy Lawrence Davidson, CNN Updated 6:33 PM ET, Sun December 16, 2018 (CNN)Greta Thunberg, a 15-year-old Swedish environmental activist, all but shamed the 190 countries represented at the United Nations COP24 conference in Poland last week. The young activist accused negotiators -- gathered in Katowice to establish rules for the implementation of the 2015 Paris Agreement on climate change -- of abandoning future generations. "You say you love your children above all else and yet you are stealing their future in front of their very eyes," Thunberg said during an address to attendees on Wednesday. The so-called "Paris Rulebook" agreed to on Saturday falls short of achieving its goals. Scientists and negotiators say that countries would have to do far more than what the rules stipulate to curb fossil fuel use and deforestation and avoid severe weather associated with global warming. Thunberg, who became a symbol for youth climate activism after skipping school to protest climate change outside of Sweden's Parliament in September, has inspired thousands of children to rally for climate justice. Below is here speech in full: My name is Greta Thunberg. I am 15 years old. I am from Sweden. I speak on behalf of Climate Justice Now. Many people say that Sweden is just a small country and it doesn't matter what we do. But I've learned you are never too small to make a difference. And if a few children can get headlines all over the world just by not going to school, then imagine what we could all do together if we really wanted to. But to do that, we have to speak clearly, no matter how uncomfortable that may be. You only speak of green eternal economic growth because you are too scared of being unpopular. You only talk about moving forward with the same bad ideas that got us into this mess, even when the only sensible thing to do is pull the emergency brake. You are not mature enough to tell it like is. Even that burden you leave to us children. But I don't care about being popular. I care about climate justice and the living planet.Our civilization is being sacrificed for the opportunity of a very small number of people to continue making enormous amounts of money. Our biosphere is being sacrificed so that rich people in countries like mine can live in luxury. It is the sufferings of the many which pay for the luxuries of the few. The year 2078, I will celebrate my 75th birthday. If I have children maybe they will spend that day with me. Maybe they will ask me about you. Maybe they will ask why you didn't do anything while there still was time to act. You say you love your children above all else, and yet you are stealing their future in front of their very eyes.Until you start focusing on what needs to be done rather than what is politically possible, there is no hope. We cannot solve a crisis without treating it as a crisis. We need to keep the fossil fuels in the ground, and we need to focus on equity. And if solutions within the system are so impossible to find, maybe we should change the system itself. We have not come here to beg world leaders to care. You have ignored us in the past and you will ignore us again.We have run out of excuses and we are running out of time. We have come here to let you know that change is coming, whether you like it or not. The real power belongs to the people. Thank you. CNN's John Sutter contributed to this report. www.cnn.com/2018/12/16/world/greta-thunberg-cop24/index.html
|
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,790
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Dec 17, 2018 4:05:34 GMT
exactly. or to get down to his level, so he understands... **sticks out tongue*** "takes one to know one! nah, nah, nah, nah, nah." he has the emotional maturity and intellect of a not-so bright 12 year old bully. My husband has repeatedly said that Trump is a 12-year-old bully. I agree. see! (enlightened/paying attention) guys know! My mom, after seeing the light, (before he was elected) called him an 8 year old bully. Teen DS piped up and corrected her saying at 8 kids are still nice, more like 12. He knew, too.
|
|
|
Post by revirdsuba99 on Dec 17, 2018 4:08:36 GMT
Poll: Two-thirds of Iowa Republicans say they would vote to reelect TrumpBY JUSTIN WISE - 12/16/18 08:38 PM EST About two-thirds of Iowa Republicans say they would vote for President Trump if the 2020 election was held today, according to a new CNN/Des Moines Register/Mediacom poll. The survey, which was released on Sunday night, found that 67 percent of the state's Republican voters said they would vote for Trump if the election were held today. Nineteen percent of GOP voters said they would consider someone else, while 10 percent said they would definitely vote for someone else. But the poll also reveals that 63 percent of Republican voters said that the Republican Party of Iowa should welcome challengers to compete at the Iowa 2020 caucuses. Twenty-six percent said that the Republican Party of Iowa should discourage potential candidates challenging Trump. ** More at link: thehill.com/homenews/campaign-polls/421625-poll-two-thirds-of-iowa-republicans-say-they-would-vote-to-reelectI have no words!!
|
|
PLurker
Prolific Pea
Posts: 9,790
Location: Behind the Cheddar Curtain
Jun 28, 2014 3:48:49 GMT
|
Post by PLurker on Dec 17, 2018 6:09:48 GMT
Poll: Two-thirds of Iowa Republicans say they would vote to reelect TrumpBY JUSTIN WISE - 12/16/18 08:38 PM EST About two-thirds of Iowa Republicans say they would vote for President Trump if the 2020 election was held today, according to a new CNN/Des Moines Register/Mediacom poll. The survey, which was released on Sunday night, found that 67 percent of the state's Republican voters said they would vote for Trump if the election were held today. Nineteen percent of GOP voters said they would consider someone else, while 10 percent said they would definitely vote for someone else. But the poll also reveals that 63 percent of Republican voters said that the Republican Party of Iowa should welcome challengers to compete at the Iowa 2020 caucuses. Twenty-six percent said that the Republican Party of Iowa should discourage potential candidates challenging Trump. ** More at link: thehill.com/homenews/campaign-polls/421625-poll-two-thirds-of-iowa-republicans-say-they-would-vote-to-reelectI have no words!! Ok. Not that it makes it that much better, but when I saw it earlier (and got disgusted and quickly clicked it away) I thought it said 2/3 of voters. I missed the Republican part. "Republican voters"; a little easier to believe but not that much easier to stomach. but maybe a little.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2018 6:23:20 GMT
|
|
|
Post by lucyg on Dec 17, 2018 7:03:53 GMT
Poll: Two-thirds of Iowa Republicans say they would vote to reelect TrumpBY JUSTIN WISE - 12/16/18 08:38 PM EST About two-thirds of Iowa Republicans say they would vote for President Trump if the 2020 election was held today, according to a new CNN/Des Moines Register/Mediacom poll. The survey, which was released on Sunday night, found that 67 percent of the state's Republican voters said they would vote for Trump if the election were held today. Nineteen percent of GOP voters said they would consider someone else, while 10 percent said they would definitely vote for someone else. But the poll also reveals that 63 percent of Republican voters said that the Republican Party of Iowa should welcome challengers to compete at the Iowa 2020 caucuses. Twenty-six percent said that the Republican Party of Iowa should discourage potential candidates challenging Trump. ** More at link: thehill.com/homenews/campaign-polls/421625-poll-two-thirds-of-iowa-republicans-say-they-would-vote-to-reelectI have no words!! Ok. Not that it makes it that much better, but when I saw it earlier (and got disgusted and quickly clicked it away) I thought it said 2/3 of voters. I missed the Republican part. "Republican voters"; a little easier to believe but not that much easier to stomach. but maybe a little. Don’t be discouraged. I think it’s a good sign if his support is down to 67% of Republican voters in Iowa or anywhere. Not so long ago, it was 90%.
|
|
Deleted
Posts: 0
Sept 20, 2024 17:43:19 GMT
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 17, 2018 13:44:03 GMT
|
|