I haven't posted much in this thread recently, but regarding Obamacare - 1. There's several plans that have been thrown around by the Republicans. It's more a matter of agreeing on/making it more complete. This is one tossed out recently: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/23/gop-senators-unveil-obamacare-replacement-bill.html http://www.cnn.com/2017/01/23/politics/collins-cassidy-obamacare-repeal/index.html The bill isn't complete though and is a work in progress. The senate has been swamped by confirmation hearings, I don't really want them to just rush into something anyway. 2. While I'm sure there's a few that would like to go that path the republicans can't just repeal the ACA at will. The democrats can filibuster the repeal and they would need 60 votes to close the filibuster in the senate. If the democrats take a bruising in 2018, then the republicans can pretty much do whatever the hell they want, but we're not there yet. 3. There's no way republican senators like Rand Paul are just going to go straight repeal without a replacement. They wouldn't even be able to get that in their own party before you even factor in the need for bipartisan support. 4. Trump has made it pretty clear he won't repeal before there's a replacement. Maybe you don't believe him, but there's still the filibuster regardless. Getting out of the TPP and not stupidly taken in a bunch more Syrian refugees were two pretty big things for me so I'm fairly happy with how he's started out, as annoying as some of the dumb shit he's said has been. I'm sure in time he'll fuck something up majorly instead of just having this endless wild speculation from all the angry anti-Trumpers. I don't get why people would be so shocked by some of the nominees. He said over and over he wants to get "our best business people" and that's what he's done with regards to a few key positions. Maybe they'll suck. We'll see... Glad to see Trump said he would defer to Mattis with regards to torture. Hopefully that'll hold up, but who knows? I'm guessing he didn't want to risk losing the one appointment everyone likes. I don't know if I'm actually so afraid of Rick Perry. I feel like he could just listen to the 'smart science people' and not fuck anything up too drastically. DeVos is the one that really bothers me. She seems like a very nice person, but holy fuck is she clueless. Sadly she'll probably pass confirmation.
I don't trust Trump to do what's actually best for anyone but himself and I especially don't trust the republican congressman to not take advantage of his stupidity and try to do whatever the hell they want.
I just want to add to what Aetius is saying here because I mostly agree with it. I lean pretty strongly to the left, but there are things like gun control where I take a more rightward position. But like Aetius says, the Republican party as it stands has gone off the deep end. Take climate change. 20, 25 years ago if we knew then what we know now there'd still be a strong debate over climate change, but it would be the difference between using regulatory solutions (Democrat/Left) vs. free-market based solutions (Republican/Right) as the best way to address the issue. But currently the GOP refuses to acknowledge that climate change even exists. How the fuck am I supposed to take the GOP seriously at all when they push this kind of idiocy?
Possibly the most absurdly transparent effort is a bill proposed in Wyoming that would just straight up punish utilities for using commercial-scale wind and solar. According to its proponents, out-of-state subsidies for renewables increase the cost of power for Wyoming residents, even though that makes no sense.
It does make sense if there are issues with demand, scalability and distribution as the article says the bill suggests. If utility suppliers are getting the cheaper renewables but can't meet the needs customers are paying for, then thats a dereliction of services. Interestingly, here's the list of 50 major infrastructure projects Trump is likely to propose for funding. In it is a large scale wind farm project in Wyoming (#17). Whether or not this will happen is debatable, but we're taking this stuff at face value, aren't we? Overall, I think there's needs to be funding for renewable energy research in tandem with promoting current scalable industry. One without the other doesn't get us anywhere.
Isn't that the point, though? They subsidize it to make it more affordable in the here and now, and taper of the subsidy as the technology gets cheaper over time anyway. Right?
Sorry, not buying it. Maybe that excuse flies in internet echo-chambers and opinion blogs but I expect more from elected leaders. They have the responsibility to rise above the gutter and engage in the issue on an intelligent, informed level. And since they can't and they refuse they're a fucking disgrace.
My point isn't against or in favor of subsidies, it's that the legislator is claiming that subsidies paid for by the taxpayers of Colorado/wherever will increase the price paid by Wyoming residents.
http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/20...ld-cut-off-feds-in-response-to-trump-threats/ Strikes me as highly unlikely to happen, but I admit there are worse things than having my taxes lowered so I don't have to pay for Jethro from Mississippi's welfare check.
I wasn't surprised that one of the co-chairs for the women's march was an anti-equality pro Sharia law 'feminist' like Linda Sarsour. Pretty typical of 3rd wave feminism. This one shocked me though. I initially thought it was fake, but apparently it's real. One of the speakers tortured a man to death over 2-3 weeks with some friends after trying to collect ransom money. The torture included things like shoving a steel pipe up his ass an ripping apart his scrotum with a pair of pliers. She served 27 years in prison. What the fuck?
Buried by the immigration ban clusterfuck is the reorganization of the National Security Council: https://www.washingtonpost.com/poli...728948-e574-11e6-a547-5fb9411d332c_story.html In what world does Trump's propagandist belong on the NSC but the DNI and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs don't?
Please forward my compliments and gratitude for the invite; I shall be remaining in the United States for the time being however.
I don't support Clinton, I oppose Trump. That said, your "Prime Minister" (whatever that means) did not put restrictions on this invite.
I too opposed Trump; however, I bring many years of knowledge in the art of curing and smoking many 4 legged animals as bartering for room and board? Is this acceptable?