Because, remember, the ‘climate change’ movement isn’t political, it’s all about science!
Green New Deal “Climate Kids†Should Hijack the Impeachment Conversation
A wise old political adage says, “When you’re ‘splainin’, you ain’t gainin’.†We need a new, ad hoc version to wake up “climate kidâ€supporters of an existentially crucial Green New Deal, now sitting politely bored—as through their principal’s speech—while Democrat elders crowd them off stage with their heated-but-trivial Mueller-based debate on whether or not to impeach Trump. I propose this: “When they’re ‘splainin’, you ain’t gainin’.†It’s frankly depressing to see passionate, idealistic kids hold still like respectable middle-aged Rotarians while adults with shallow, juvenile agendas waste civilization’s ever-more-precious time and dominate the floor.
Hey, climate kids, it’s time to act like kids and get seriously rowdy. This is one “adult†conversation you desperately need to disrupt. And not merely disrupt but actually hijack. The future of the Green New Deal—and therefore of civilization itself—may depend on you remembering that you’re still kids and therefore totally smashing up what the old farts had planned. You’ve already earned your maturity street creds by your incredibly sane, responsible climate activism; it’s time to have some delinquent, disruptive, old-fart-torturing fun. (snip)
But my pet disruption idea—impeaching Trump for his extremist attack on climate—already takes care of the respectability element. See, you won’t be disrupting the conversation just to disrupt it; you’ll actually be contributing something highly relevant—or as overpaid respectable attorneys say, “on point.†In fact, far more on point than what the purported grownups are saying. Therein lies the special beauty of my climate impeachment scheme: it’s rationally and morally sounder than anything the so-called adults are pushing, while having the added juvenile thrill value of pissing them off to the maximal max.
As a passive-aggressive old fart desperately clinging to the last tatters of youth, I passionately relish that juvenile thrill value. I believe the relevant juvenile joy here is called “hostile obedienceâ€: obeying so totally and pointlessly that your very obedience is an act of satiric ridicule toward your “respectable†elders. What you’re obeying is the ardent desire of “progressive†Democrat elders to impeach Trump—who richly deserves impeachment. But your stated reason for impeaching him—his way-beyond-criminal climate policy—makes a cosmic mockery of the far shallower reasons put forth by his conventionally progressive would-be impeachers.
That was the most vacuous piece of nonsense I’ve wasted my time reading since Elwood’s last “Trump Rant”.
Kye,
LOL. Get f@cked, sweetie.
Little missy throwing a hissy…
BWAHA! LOL. Get f*cked.
BWAHA! LOL. Get f*cked.
This is fun!
Global Warming Provides A Marvelous Excuse For Global Socialism. – Margaret Thatcher
And that is ALL it is about.
OK, this is his new rimshot.
As opposed to rim job.
Well, at least the author has made one thing clear: he tells us what the other leftists won’t, that he believes that political disagreement with the left constitutes a “high crime or misdemeanor.”
However, the last two Republican Presidents have both made the same mistake: President Bush simply withdrew our signature from the Kyoto Accords, rather than doing the right thing, submitting it to the Senate for ratification, where it would have been overwhelmingly rejected. (That’s why President Clinton never submitted it for ratification.)
And now President Trump withdrew the US from the Paris climate agreement, when he should have submitted it to the Senate for ratification. Oh, in this case, President Obama had it written so that it wasn’t a treaty requiring ratification, but Mr Trump could have declared it one anyway, and given it to the Senate for rejection.
dana,
Obstruction of justice, conspiracy with a foreign entity, bribing a sex partner to keep quiet (Individual One as an unindicted co-conspirator), violating the emoluments clause etc etc and so forth. These are more than political disagreements. They may be as bad as Clinton!
Most people who voted for Clinton in the 2016 Democratic primaries were unaware Clinton was under criminal investigation at the time, as the mainstream media failed to report it. Subsequent leaks of Democratic National Committee emails revealed primary election tampering, vote rigging, and voter suppression. The Obama administration and Clinton campaign colluded with Russianoperatives to produce an “insurance policy” of fake newsagainst Trump’s election alleging a Trump-Russiaconnection.
LOL. Get F*cked.
IOW he’s talking about Willie.
And I’ll say it again, the courts have been very fuzzy on emoluments. Pinning your hopes to that is like pinning your hopes to Mule Ears, Nadless, and Schiff For Brains.
Did you ever read the article? The writer in question stated, explicitly, “impeaching Trump for his extremist attack on climate.”
Donald Trump will leave office peacefully when his term expires; he will not be removed from office by the Senate.
In fact, LOL, Get f@cked, sweetie!
will be my forever response to Lil, formwiz and Kye, since you’ve given up discussions. (Not that formwiz or Lil ever discussed anything. Kye did, early on.)
We can smell the desperation emanating from the far-right. You’re enraged! Fake news! LOL
Aw. Don’t go away upset little missy.
Perhaps if you go whining to Teach to make those bad people stop writing mean things to you maybe it’ll stop or something. Tell him we hurt your delicate little feelings.
The facts are all against giving governments more money and power to stop the climate from changing for the first time in the earth’s history.
And so you ‘argue’ with vulgarities and name calling.
That is all the Left has.
We patriots have the truth on our side.
We’re enraged? The only desperation comes from the one swearing all over the places.
It smells like disaster.
Allow me to essplain, Elwood. We’re perfectly ready to discuss any topic that you are willing to approach realistically ad truthfully. But when you insist there are more than two sexes which is scientifically not true what is the use in carrying on a conversation?
I started reading another nut-case on sex and here’s what I got:
“MEL Magazine recently published a piece entitled “Can Men Sharing Their Experiences With Abortion Make It a Better Experience for Everyone?†I didn’t read it. I couldn’t get past the editor’s note at the top of the page:
Editor’s Note: For brevity’s sake, we’re using the word “women†to describe people who get pregnant and “men†to describe those who impregnate them. But people of all genders can get pregnant and get people pregnant, and this guide is intended to be a useful resource for them as well.
Now let’s discuss how many races there are and see if you can be honest about that. I doubt it. You keep bitching about all these fake crimes Trump supposedly committed ad yet he’s not being indicted for crap. You leftists can’t even muster up the balls to impeach the guy because you know it will fail. You’re all phonies!
Why would I or any other guy here engage you in an honest discussion on any topic when the minute you start to lose you start the name calling or IGNORE ALL THE EVIDENCE?
It’s not worth it. I’d rather kibitz with the guys I agree on an not be called names.
Trump 2020
Happy Fathers Day – Why Dads matter:
https://commoncts.blogspot.com/2019/06/happy-fathers-day-why-dads-matter.html
The article is the same stuff you saw 50 years ago WRT the protest movement.
Same stuff, never changes, same people behind it.