HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Retired » Retired Forums » 2016 Postmortem (Forum) » Holes in Clinton's climat...

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 11:43 AM

 

Holes in Clinton's climate plan: no stand on Keystone, fracking, oil exports & Arctic ocean drilling



Does Clinton support or oppose the Keystone XL oil pipeline? Or Arctic offshore drilling? Or tougher restrictions on fracking? Or the oil industry’s push to lift the 1970s ban on exporting U.S. crude oil? Clinton avoided all those questions in the solar-heavy climate plan she outlined Sunday night and in her speech promoting it Monday in Iowa — and she declined yet again Monday to say where she stands on Keystone.
...

“Clinton’s climate plan is remarkable for what it doesn’t say, yet,” California-based environmental activist R.L. Miller, who founded the Climate Hawks Vote PAC, said in a statement. Specifically, she added, Clinton offered “no effort to keep fossil fuels in the ground, no price on carbon; no word on Keystone XL, Arctic oil or other carbon bombs; no word on fracking.”
...

At the core of the tension is climate activists’ insistence that the next president go beyond defending Obama’s main approach to global warming — a series of EPA regulations that will throttle carbon emissions from major pollution sources such as power plants. Instead, they want Obama’s successor to commit to reining in an oil and gas industry that has turned the U.S. into one of the world’s top fuel exporters.

Anti-fossil fuel campaign group Oil Change International’s campaigns director, David Turnbull, warned that greens are looking for a candidate with a plan to keep oil and gas locked up, not just expand wind and solar projects.

“Any coherent climate policy needs to address not just our urgent need to continue scaling up renewable energy but also the reality that fossil fuel production needs to be swiftly curtailed as well,” he said.
...

Read more: http://www.politico.com/story/2015/07/the-holes-in-hillary-clintons-climate-plan-120682.html#ixzz3hCXox2jT


Edit: fixed grammar of title

82 replies, 3600 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 82 replies Author Time Post
Reply Holes in Clinton's climate plan: no stand on Keystone, fracking, oil exports & Arctic ocean drilling (Original post)
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 OP
NCTraveler Jul 2015 #1
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #5
NCTraveler Jul 2015 #8
LineLineLineLineReply k
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #11
NCTraveler Jul 2015 #12
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #13
NCTraveler Jul 2015 #15
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #17
NCTraveler Jul 2015 #20
Andy823 Jul 2015 #32
zappaman Jul 2015 #33
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #35
NCTraveler Jul 2015 #39
zappaman Jul 2015 #46
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #70
BainsBane Jul 2015 #72
zappaman Jul 2015 #74
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #75
zappaman Jul 2015 #76
Sheepshank Jul 2015 #47
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #57
BainsBane Jul 2015 #54
artislife Jul 2015 #56
restorefreedom Jul 2015 #65
askew Jul 2015 #16
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #18
Sheepshank Jul 2015 #2
WDIM Jul 2015 #3
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #4
ibegurpard Jul 2015 #9
BainsBane Jul 2015 #21
ismnotwasm Jul 2015 #41
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #43
Sheepshank Jul 2015 #49
BainsBane Jul 2015 #58
Comrade Grumpy Jul 2015 #69
ibegurpard Jul 2015 #45
BainsBane Jul 2015 #51
GoneFishin Jul 2015 #6
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #7
zappaman Jul 2015 #48
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #82
BainsBane Jul 2015 #24
GoneFishin Jul 2015 #79
mmonk Jul 2015 #10
Agschmid Jul 2015 #14
Report1212 Jul 2015 #19
MisterP Jul 2015 #81
BainsBane Jul 2015 #22
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #23
BainsBane Jul 2015 #25
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #26
BainsBane Jul 2015 #28
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #36
BainsBane Jul 2015 #42
Sheepshank Jul 2015 #59
BainsBane Jul 2015 #61
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #62
Sheepshank Jul 2015 #67
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #68
BainsBane Jul 2015 #29
RoccoR5955 Jul 2015 #30
BainsBane Jul 2015 #31
RoccoR5955 Jul 2015 #34
BainsBane Jul 2015 #38
ismnotwasm Jul 2015 #40
RoccoR5955 Jul 2015 #63
Sheepshank Jul 2015 #60
RoccoR5955 Jul 2015 #27
ismnotwasm Jul 2015 #37
Cheese Sandwich Jul 2015 #44
Sheepshank Jul 2015 #50
ismnotwasm Jul 2015 #53
ismnotwasm Jul 2015 #52
BainsBane Jul 2015 #55
Sheepshank Jul 2015 #64
BainsBane Jul 2015 #71
Sheepshank Jul 2015 #73
SunSeeker Jul 2015 #78
kenn3d Jul 2015 #66
Purveyor Jul 2015 #77
WillyT Jul 2015 #80

Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 11:49 AM

1. I appreciate that her and O'Malley have released comprehensive plans for us to look at.

 

So far, O'Malley has by far the best plan, Hillary second, Sanders third simply because I can't find his comprehensive plan. Does someone have a link so I can judge the three fairly?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #1)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 12:37 PM

5. I think their past actions would be a better predictor of future actions.

 

Anyone can say a plan. Politicians say anything to get elected.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #5)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 12:56 PM

8. I'll play.

 

What past accomplishments does Sanders have in this area. From your words it is clear you agree he doesn't have a comprehensive plan and that past actions are better then having said comprehensive plan. So, where are his accomplishments that have addressed climate change in a comprehensive manner.

"I think their past actions would be a better predictor of future actions."

"Politicians say anything to get elected."

You mean like releasing legislation to regulate parts of Wall Street as one puts their hat in the ring for the Presidency?

When your main goal is the misery and opposition to the fun of others, not political discourse, you might want to think about going a different track.

"I'm deleting this because Clinton defenders are having too much fun with it."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #11)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 01:46 PM

12. Exactly my point. That is what I would have gone with if I were you.

 

Easier than coming up with an accomplishment. When the question is asked, I often find the answer to be some form of deflection as is being done here.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #12)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 01:49 PM

13. What's the point in having a conversation with people who will derail with personal insults

 

when you do present facts and evidence?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #13)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 01:56 PM

15. I do all of the time.

 

I mean all of the time. I have done nothing to derail. I asked for accomplishments. You have a clear record of thrashing Hillary and O'Malley, while never backing anything up with respect to Sanders. I posed some basic questions above. Questions that are one hundred percent relevant to your op. Where have I delivered a personal assault? Never mind, please don't get side-tracked. You posted an op that went negative on Clintons climate plan. You do so in support of Sanders, not out of concern for Clinton. Please link to Sanders comprehensive climate plan. Please link to his comprehensive accomplishments on climate reform. That is not derailing, though I think I Know why you might want to make that claim.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #15)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:04 PM

17. Hillary supports fracking, Keystone XL, Arctic Ocean Drilling. Her policy and record sucks.

 

Do your own research.

I'm not your personal assistant.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #17)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:16 PM

20. I truly expected something very similar to what you typed.

 

I do my own research. The research I have done is what brought me to understand how this conversation would go. I don't think, I know Hillary supports fracking, Keystone XL, not sure about Artic drilling but it wouldn't surprise me. What you don't know is the record of that which you claim to support. You deflect any time it is mentioned. The hide I received that you posted up thread was born out of your trashing two democrats at every turn. Now I simply asked about your guys plan, and you deflect deflect deflect. It is why my hidden comment is spot on.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #20)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:52 PM

32. Yep,

I think the "cheese" in this persons sandwich is "limburger" cheese, and it's getting really old and smelly.

Same old attacks with no actual response to questions that are asked.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #20)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:58 PM

33. Nothing but attack OPs.

Like some sort of agenda...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #33)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:05 PM

35. Very mysterious. Seems to be some sort of attack agenda. I can't figure out this mystery.

 



Alberta tar sands before and after shot:


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #35)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:16 PM

39. You're getting closer.

 

"Seems to be some sort of attack agenda."

And once again, you deflect. It is becoming extremely transparent.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #35)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:43 PM

46. needs more ham.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #46)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:36 PM

70. You're just trying to make me hungry so I will break for dinner and stop fighting for justice on the

 

internet.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #70)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:49 PM

72. justice?

a campaign against one candidate is justice?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #70)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 05:03 PM

74. If by "fighting for justice" you mean negative OPs on every Democrat except Sanders.

Then yes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #74)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 05:22 PM

75. Negative shmegative

 

If it's true, it's true. If something is false you could always point that out. If you want.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #75)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 05:25 PM

76. Uh huh.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #35)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:44 PM

47. I do believe that this picture was debunked as being from two different locations

 

they were not accurate before and after pictures.

While I don't doubt the after pictures are nasty horrid, accuracy becomes quite important when the article is trying to prove a point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #47)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:06 PM

57. It's so important to be accurate I know.

 

Go ahead and watch a presentation by the guy who took the "after" picture



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #35)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:01 PM

54. On that basis

You should be supporting O'Malley: http://www.democraticunderground.com/1251478832

Unless of course supporting someone really isn't the point.

BTW, when did Hillary spill all that oil? Was that before, after, or during Benghazi? Maybe that's where she dispatched the marine helicopters, huh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #33)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:06 PM

56. Like the truth?

 

She is running with a platform. Yes, well we have an interested party.

Planet earth is asking about her most pressing issues

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NCTraveler (Reply #8)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:21 PM

65. he got a 95% favorable rating

from the league of conservation voters. He is also spoken out very strongly against Keystone XL and fracking

full lcv scorecard here

http://scorecard.lcv.org/moc/bernie-sanders

hope that helps

edit: talking about sanders

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #5)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:03 PM

16. Another reason to support O'Malley.

He didn't just talk about environmental/climate issues. He did it. From putting so much red tape around fracking that there was a de facto fracking moratorium while he was governor, to cleaning up the Chesapeake Bay, to pushing through the largest offshore wind farm on the East Coast. O'Malley delivered on progressive environmental/climate issues.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to askew (Reply #16)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:09 PM

18. O'Malley supported fracking in Pennsylvania through his vote on the regional commission.

 

As governor of Maryland he controlled a vote on the Susquehanna River Basin Commission.

He routinely used his vote on the SRBC to approve fracking operations in Pennsylvania.

He may have blocked it in Maryland where it was politically easier.

But he also rubber stamped industry operations in Pennsylvania where that was politically easier.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 11:50 AM

2. perhaps she knows those others will be come less needed

 

when billions of solar panels are implemented. At least her plan would have those displaced employees moving onot another industry.

What is Bernies plan for these industries and the employees.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 11:54 AM

3. She hired a lobbyist that use to work for Transcanada and lobbied for Keystone.

I think we know where Clinton stands on Keystone, offshore drilling, and fracking. The Clintons have always been a friend to big oil and big money. She's never met a wealthy donor she didn't like.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WDIM (Reply #3)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 12:05 PM

4. No kidding she was Sec of State during the whole time Keystone was being debated

 

People were out protesting it in the streets from New York to DC to Nebraska to Oklahoma and Texas, and in Canada. People putting their bodies on their lines to block it. So people want to know of Sec. Clinton Which side is she on?

She sold fracking internationally. Obama was a natural gas booster, he brought fracking to America. If Hillary is going to be Obama Part II, I expect more of the same.

Clinton on carbon tax:


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WDIM (Reply #3)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 12:56 PM

9. this is why no one believes her

On anything.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ibegurpard (Reply #9)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:16 PM

21. Clearly not true

Since she is 40 points ahead of Sanders in the polling average. http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/2016_democratic_presidential_nomination-3824.html

She has already voted against drilling in ANWR. In fact, she was co-sponsor of that amendment. What environmental legislation has Bernie succeeded in getting passed?


http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/55463/hillary-clinton/30/environment#.VbfIeflViko

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #21)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:21 PM

41. Interestingly

No response.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #41)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:28 PM

43. CNN Poll: Majority of voters do not trust or like Clinton

 



http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2015/06/02/cnn-poll-hillary-clinton-lead-dnt-zeleny.cnn

Let me guess CNN is part of the NY Times / Dave Sirota / liberal media conspiracy...?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #43)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:46 PM

49. well...a faction at Du is certainly doing it's part in spreading lies regarding Clinton

 

...and they they call her verasity into question?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #43)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:11 PM

58. More like her than like Bernie

according to the majority of polls, though Bernie does poll better among Republicans.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #58)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:31 PM

69. Link to poll about Bernie doing well with Republicans? I haven't seen that.

 

I have seen him (and Hillary) doing well with self-described conservative Democratic primary voters in New Hampshire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #21)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:35 PM

45. People can support who they think can win

It doesn't mean they trust them. Which explains her high negatives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ibegurpard (Reply #45)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:50 PM

51. Her negatives are high among Republicans

but among Democrats her favorables are higher than Sanders. Sanders negatives are higher among Democrats than the general population.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 12:40 PM

6. I have had 7 years of smooth talk. Talk is cheap.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneFishin (Reply #6)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 12:53 PM

7. Obama did some good things but he increased fossil fuel extraction and exports, and bragged about it

 

We laid enough pipeline to reach the moon or something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #7)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:46 PM

48. "Obama did some good things"

Bless your heart

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to zappaman (Reply #48)

Wed Jul 29, 2015, 11:57 AM

82. Thanks!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to GoneFishin (Reply #6)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:34 PM

24. You have had this in 7 years

Last edited Tue Jul 28, 2015, 09:27 PM - Edit history (1)

Opening of diplomatic relations with Cuba for the first time since the Revolution
A nuclear treaty with Iran instead of refusing to have dialog
The only national healthcare bill to be passed in the history of this country, something presidents since Teddy Roosevelt have wanted done.
Wide-scale pardons of non-violent drug offenders and proposals to reform sentencing. Actual legislation passed that lessened disparity between sentencing for crack and other drugs.
Vigorous protection of voting rights
Extension of Title IX to cover rape victims, establishing rape as a civil rights issue
The Lilly Ledbetter Act for equal pay for equal work
A come back from economic meltdown and dramatic improvement in hiring and unemployment to pre-crisis levels.
And many other successes.

You have had far more than "smooth talking." What you have not had is the restoration of the white upper-middle and middle class back to what it sees as its rightful place atop the capitalist world order.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #24)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 06:39 PM

79. Right on all points. But I would be happy just to not be supporting welfare payments to

General Electric, Citibank, Exxon Mobil, and Goldman Sachs as they permanently destroy our drinking water, air, and food supply, and as we simultaneously cut education, nutrition programs, and don't lift a goddammed finger to implement a decent child care system.

Notice that none of those very important accomplishments erroded the President's billionaire friends' profits. Meanwhile he gives the nod to drill baby drill, even though it is clear that they are just as unprepared to prevent an oil disaster as they were before the Gulf disaster.

And keeping with his rock solid theme of shoveling taxpayer money into his Wall Street friends' pockets, all of the bank bailout money went to the banks and none of it went to the under water mortgage holders or the small businesses that were supposedly the hardest hit by the tight credit markets.

The bailout was a grand finale ruse by the Bush administration to loot the treasury one more time before the Democrats got a hold of the purse strings, and Barack Obama could have imposed some limits on how the money was to be used. But instead they used it for bonuses and to buy other banks, making the problem worse. Meanwhile the underwater homeowners get no help while tens of billions of dollars of bonuses are given to the banksters who caused the mess due to their selfish and irresponsible behavior.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 01:35 PM

10. More like canyon.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 01:53 PM

14. O'Malley may be the best on this issue.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:15 PM

19. Her answer on Keystone this morning was pretty wild

A presidential candidate who will tell you she won't answer a question until she's already president? What the heck?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Report1212 (Reply #19)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 08:56 PM

81. that's literally how they ran the campaign from the get-go

of course they weren't expecting a primary challenger, hence the alarming flailing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:24 PM

22. She was co-sponsor of the ANWR amendment to prevent drilling there

Here are her votes on environment issues

http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/55463/hillary-clinton/30/environment#.VbfIeflViko

What environmental protection legislation has Bernie succeeded in getting passed? I am not aware of any.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #22)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:28 PM

23. Who cares? That's weak. That was a battle from like 1989 and she finally got hip in like 2005 or so.

 

That's like coming out in support of Nelson Mandela 20 years after he's been released from prison.

CURRENT ISSUES: Arctic ocean drilling. Coal and oil EXPORTS. Mountaintop blasting. Fracking. Keystone XL. etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #23)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:38 PM

25. As opposed to Marching in the 1960s

which is supposed to be enough for black people to fall in line. What record does Bernie have advancing environmental protection? We know that when Clinton was in the Senate, she got shit done. Bernie has not. He's been in congress for close to three decades and doesn't have one piece of environmental legislation to show for his time there. He has a voting record, as Clinton does, but no record of sponsoring successful bills.

Talk is cheap, yet it's enough for you. In fact, you would seem to prefer it to an actual record of successful environmental protection. Naturally preventing drilling in ANWAR can't compare to the two post offices Bernie got named. Now that's a real progressive agenda.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #25)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:39 PM

26. This is about Hillary's environmental policies sucking

 

Nice derail attempt though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #26)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:46 PM

28. Well, it takes a lot of work to keep up with the ever changing

matrix of standards of what constitutes an acceptable record and what doesn't. A record of 50 yrs ago is good enough for Bernie on Civil rights. Yet we are supposed to ignore a gun vote from 2004 because that is too long ago. He spoke out against tough on crime politics, but voted for the 1994 crime bills. Still, the changes in policing and prisons is entirely the fault of the First Lady at the time and not a congressman who voted for those bills. I guess that makes the Iraq War Laura Bush's fault instead of Hillary's?

I think the point is clear enough. Sanders good, Clinton bad. Consistency and principle, entirely inconsequential.

Hillary has a strong environmental record, and she has proven success in getting environmental legislation passed. Getting shit done matters. It matters to people who want to see government function.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #28)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:11 PM

36. Hillary's energy plan

 

Tar sands before and after:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #36)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:25 PM

42. Once again

We see truth is entirely inconsequential.

You addressed none of my points because you have no logical argument. If you cared even a little bit about the environment you would discuss actual policy and issues, yet you can't do that because the facts are not on your side. Instead, play to emotion. It's all you have.

Her plan sets ambitious standards for solar energy and reducing green house emissions. If you cared at all about the environment, you would recognize that as important. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/28/us/politics/hillary-clinton-lays-out-climate-change-plan.html?_r=0

The way to get America off fossil fuels is to develop green energy sources. Why should someone who claims to care about the environment object to that?

Of course you prefer no environmental plan than one that focuses on renewable energy. Makes a lot of sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #36)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:12 PM

59. nope, these pictures are not before and after of the same region

 

yet you keep posting it. Why must you provide falsehoods to bolster your stand?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #59)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:17 PM

61. Cause facts are not on his side. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #59)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:18 PM

62. I don't believe you.

 

Here is a slideshow presentation by the guy who took the "after" photo.

There are many photos that are of the same quality as the "before" picture anyways.

I really couldn't care less about the picture. The message of the picture is the important thing. Whether or not two particular images came from the same location doesn't matter when no one disputes the "after" picture and there are many similar photos for the "before" picture.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #62)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:26 PM

67. you don't believe me, but you acknowledge they are not accurate...alrighty then. n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #67)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:30 PM

68. Here is the MF'ing slideshow presentation by the photographer.

 



He took the right side picture. And I don't know for sure about the left hand picture, but there are many photos in his set of similar quality to the left hand photo, so I really don't care.

You're probably just making shit up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #26)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:49 PM

29. BTW

You yourself admitted above that Sanders has no environmental plan. That would seem a huge, gaping chasm, not just holes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #22)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:49 PM

30. Here are Bernie's votes on the environment

 

From the same site that you pulled the link from:
http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/27110/bernie-sanders/30/environment#.VbfOJbc0o2g
At least as long a list as Mrs. Clinton's

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #30)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:52 PM

31. Yes, but no leadership on any bills

No sponsorship or co-sponsorship. He votes for things presented to him, which means he has a good voting record as a Senator. That is not the same as active leadership, as working to accomplish environmental protection.

Of course his list is longer. Sanders has been in congress since the 90s. Clinton was there for about 8 years. Yet despite that, she ACHIEVED protection of ANWR. She didn't just vote for it. She got shit done.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #31)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:01 PM

34. Why are you folks just attacking?

 

Why is it about what YOU feel is a person's leadership skills, and ability to raise money?
Why is it not solely about the issues that face us today.
I am certain that Bernie had co-sponsored environmental bills, heck he co-sponsored all that are at the link: http://votesmart.org/candidate/key-votes/27110/bernie-sanders?sponsorships=1#.VbfQvLc0o2g
That's not enough for some of you, I guess.
You would rather have a person with no opinion on one of the most important environmental issues that face us, and one who will not stand up to the financial institutions. Not me. I want a candidate who is not taking money from super pacs, one with stunning leadership characteristics (my opinion, which I am entitled to) and one who does not attack opponents.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #34)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:13 PM

38. This is an attack thread.

against Clinton. You mean why am I defending?

None of those are environmental.

Did any of his sponsored bills pass besides the two post offices being named?

It is simply false that she has no opinion. She has an environmental plan. Bernie has put forward no environmental plan. How does that mean she doesn't have an opinion?

No candidate takes money from Super Pacs. It is in fact illegal. His repeating that claim takes advantage of voters ignorance about campaign finance. Hillary isn't taking money from Super Pacs either. Nor is Jeb or Walker. They can't. It is against campaign finance law. Only one candidate is pretending he is special for obeying the law.


Technically known as independent expenditure-only committees, Super may raise unlimited sums of money from corporations, unions, associations and individuals, then spend unlimited sums to overtly advocate for or against political candidates. Super must, however, report their donors to the Federal Election Commission on a monthly or quarterly basis -- the Super choice -- as a traditional PAC would. Unlike traditional , Super are prohibited from donating money directly to political candidates.
https://www.opensecrets.org/pacs/superpacs.php


It's easy to promise something no candidate can do anyway.

Bernie does take money from PACs and has throughout his career. One PAC that has supported him for over a decade, whose treasurer is Bernie's his Field Director, was recently fined for violating the already far too meager campaign finance law . http://www.timesargus.com/article/20150704/NEWS03/707049936

I have been told Bernie disavows any PAC activity on his behalf, but if that were true, why would he continue to keep in a high position within the campaign the Treasurer of a long-term PAC for Bernie? And why has he accepted money from that PAC?

Super PACs can't contribute directly to candidates, but they can run ads and campaign on behalf of candidates. That is precisely the purpose of the Super PACs set up around Sanders presidential campaign. Here are just two of them.
1) Bet on Bernie 2016 http://www.pledgesanders2016.com/

2) Billionaires for Bernie. http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/powerpost/wp/2015/07/15/theres-a-new-super-pac-for-bernie-sanders-it-wants-billionaire-donors/

You want someone who tells you what you want to hear. I want someone who talks about what they can get done as president and has a record of accomplishment to show they have the capacity to get things done. The rest of the Democratic electorate will make their own choices.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #34)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:17 PM

40. The OP is attacking Hillary

I don't want to play "I know you are but what am I" games either, but Hillary has put forth a solid, workable environmental plan that lobs the ball in the Republican court.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #40)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:18 PM

63. How is it an attack

 

when someone brings up an issue which one disagrees with?
It's about an issue, it's not personal.
The other day here I saw someone say that people who were for Sanders were "crazy."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to RoccoR5955 (Reply #34)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:15 PM

60. Why are you folks just attacking?: no one is going to accept bashing post after post

 

without kicking back.

No one is going accept falsehoods and conjecture as if they were truthes, without pointing out the hypocrisy that the bashers are trying to hide.

That's why.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 02:45 PM

27. I cannot stand with a candidate that does not support protecting our environment.

 

Keystone XL is a harm to our environment. If someone takes no stand, it's as bad as taking a negative stand.
Our environment is one thing we CANNOT lose. There is no Plan(et) B.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:13 PM

37. I think she will be excellent on the environment when she is elected

On Environmental Issues, Hillary Clinton is a No-Brainer Over Rivals

In a better world, presidential candidates would debate how to solve the climate change crisis. Instead, climate change and other environmental issues are another area where Republicans and Democrats disagree. In fact, most leading Republicans won’t even admit climate change is happening.
HRC FergusonConversely, Hillary Clinton’s record during her eight years in the Senate should be encouraging to environmentalists. The League of Conservation Voters issues a report card every year on members of Congress. During then-Sen. Clinton’s time in office, she amassed a lifetime score of 82 out of 100.
As a means of comparison, current Republican Senators Ted Cruz, Lindsey Graham, Rand Paul, and Marco Rubio have lifetime scores of 11, 11, 9, and 9, respectively. There is no comparison.
While in the senate, Clinton voted to:
Keep drillers out of public lands, including Alaska’s Arctic National Wildlife Refuge.
Support clean, safe, renewable energy.
Protect families by ensuring water and air are clean.
Seek alternatives to coal.
Provide assistance for low income families for help with energy bills.

Read more: http://bluenationreview.com/environmental-issues-hillary-clinton-brainer-rivals/#ixzz3hDOcQJAL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #37)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:35 PM

44. That's nice, a "news" site with all pro-Hillary articles

 


That proves something

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #44)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:49 PM

50. I'm sure Bernie has his pro articles too.

 

Its just that there are too many vocal Bernie Supporers that never seem to provide them. Instead, they are too busy hootng and hollering about attendances and bashing Hillary.

Perhaps a change in tactics is in order?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #50)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:52 PM

53. Indeed

Funny that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Reply #44)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 03:52 PM

52. I take it you don't like her?

I like her and I'll be ecstatic when she's president.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #52)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:03 PM

55. I'll have to tell you about the Seinfeld episode I think about

whenever I think of Hillary winning the Nov 2016 election.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #55)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:19 PM

64. oh what the heck...go ahead :)

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Sheepshank (Reply #64)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:41 PM

71. posted without comment

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #71)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:55 PM

73. PERFECT.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to BainsBane (Reply #71)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 06:22 PM

78. LOL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ismnotwasm (Reply #37)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 04:23 PM

66. ^ "I think she will be excellent on the environment when she is elected" ^

Hmmm.... That's pretty much, but not quite exactly what she said this morning when she refused to answer the Keystone XL Pipeline question put to her directly by a voter (presumably a supporter).

First a looooong pause (almost a "deer in the headlights" moment).... followed by a couple of somewhat dodgy excuses about having kinda started the whole project herself as SoS, and not wanting to 2nd guess Obama.... and then finally:

"If it's undecided when I become president, I will answer your question," Clinton said during the New Hampshire town hall.

Phew... no doubt about it, it is sure not easy to stump when you're the presumptive presidential candidate. But I must tell you Hillary, a lot of us would still like you to use the word "if" instead of "when", in such statements.

She's so undecided on so many important issues, yet still so certain about her inauguration.

So so so.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to kenn3d (Reply #66)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 05:54 PM

77. I'm wondering if this will be highlighted on the network

 

News shows this evening.

Certainly comes off as "weaselish", indeed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cheese Sandwich (Original post)

Tue Jul 28, 2015, 07:35 PM

80. K & R !!!

 


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread