Collarspace Discussion Forums


Home  Login  Search 

RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency


View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
 
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 5:03:49 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: dcnovice

quote:

since cases brought by this guy's office are currently being thrown out of court for a lack of evidence


Rich, do you know what percentage of cases are being dismissed? I did some Googling, but struck out, alas.



Nope. Sorry. If we take him at his words though, that a few random executions by slow torture was the idea, then it all becomes rather suspect, doesn't it?


(in reply to dcnovice)
Profile   Post #: 21
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 5:11:34 PM   
kalikshama


Posts: 14805
Joined: 8/8/2010
Status: offline
quote:

Nope. Sorry. If we take him at his words though, that a few random executions by slow torture was the idea, then it all becomes rather suspect, doesn't it?


So Allen West labeling Congressional Progressive Caucus Communists is a metaphor according to you, but you take crucifixion literally?

Or am I misunderstanding and you are tongue-in-cheek here?

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 22
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 5:13:53 PM   
erieangel


Posts: 2237
Joined: 6/19/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

quote:

Nope. Sorry. If we take him at his words though, that a few random executions by slow torture was the idea, then it all becomes rather suspect, doesn't it?


So Allen West labeling Congressional Progressive Caucus Communists is a metaphor according to you, but you take crucifixion literally?

Or am I misunderstanding and you are tongue-in-cheek here?



And my questions get ignored, yet again...because "I don't read".


(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 23
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 6:12:12 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: kalikshama

So Allen West labeling Congressional Progressive Caucus Communists is a metaphor according to you, but you take crucifixion literally?

Or am I misunderstanding and you are tongue-in-cheek here?




Yep. That would be misunderstanding then. The EPA Avenger calls it an analogy that expresses his philosophy, I completely accept that. Where do you get that I'm taking it literally?

(in reply to kalikshama)
Profile   Post #: 24
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 6:19:16 PM   
SoftBonds


Posts: 862
Joined: 2/10/2012
Status: offline 		After 8 years of Bush appointees telling companies to ignore rules, pollute all they want, and forget about safety if it saves a buck (see deep-water horizon), I think the number of polluters, OSHA violators, etc was probably such that going after everyone was a recipe for both failure and economic devastation (remember, primary means of enforcing EPA rules is fines). A far better strategy would be to pick one "worst offender," in each industry, come down hard on them, and look at the rest with a "you wanna be next," glare, and watch the industries get back in shape.
Oh, wait, that is what the OP is complaining about, huh?
You are right OP, the EPA should hit every company violating the rules, instead of picking a few and giving the rest a chance to get back in proper shape...

_____________________________

Elite Thread Hijacker!
Ignored: ThompsonX, RealOne (so folks know why I don't reply)

The last poster is often not the "winner," of the thread, just the one who was most annoying.

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 25
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 6:25:07 PM   
dcnovice


Posts: 37282
Joined: 8/2/2006
Status: offline
quote:

If we take him at his words though, that a few random executions by slow torture was the idea, then it all becomes rather suspect, doesn't it?


I'll probably regret wading into this, but here goes.

After watching the video twice now, I would divide "his words" into two parts: the crucifixion analogy and the "example" message that followed. The analogy, no doubt about it, was boneheaded. As Armendariz himself said, it was "crude" and of dubious appropriateness, and he apologized for using it. Obviously, the EPA should not be prosecuting "random" folks as a terror tactic.

Nor, honestly, do I think that's what Armendariz said they were doing. He talked about prosecuting those who were not complying with the law, which has been the goal of judicial systems for centuries. Making an example of those who violate environmental laws strikes me as akin to making examples of those who violate securities laws or antidiscrimination laws or plain old criminal laws. I wish we could count on everyone to obey the law because it's the right thing to do, but not even my naivete stretches that far. Sad as it is to say, knowing the consequences of law-breaking does, I think, help impel some folks to abide by the law. (Whether we like every law by which they must abide, which may not be the case on the environmental front, is another story.)

At the risk of sounding Clintonian, I'm not sure you mean by "all" when you ask if "it all becomes rather suspect." The cases Armendariz filed? Every case Region 6 filed? The entire work of the EPA? Those seem like heavy conclusions to support with a single analogy (introduced as imperfect and later apologized for) by a single (of ten) regional administrator, particularly when we don't know what proportion of cases are actually being dismissed for lack of evidence.

Edited for typo and pronoun imprecision.

< Message edited by dcnovice -- 4/28/2012 6:42:00 PM >

_____________________________

No matter how cynical you become,
it's never enough to keep up.

JANE WAGNER, THE SEARCH FOR SIGNS OF
INTELLIGENT LIFE IN THE UNIVERSE

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 26
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 6:27:22 PM   
erieangel


Posts: 2237
Joined: 6/19/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SoftBonds

After 8 years of Bush appointees telling companies to ignore rules, pollute all they want, and forget about safety if it saves a buck (see deep-water horizon), I think the number of polluters, OSHA violators, etc was probably such that going after everyone was a recipe for both failure and economic devastation (remember, primary means of enforcing EPA rules is fines). A far better strategy would be to pick one "worst offender," in each industry, come down hard on them, and look at the rest with a "you wanna be next," glare, and watch the industries get back in shape.
Oh, wait, that is what the OP is complaining about, huh?
You are right OP, the EPA should hit every company violating the rules, instead of picking a few and giving the rest a chance to get back in proper shape...



It will mean huge man hours, increased personnel at the EPA, to hit every violator of EPA regulations. I don't believe Heretic would want the government to go that route, either, think of the cost!!!


(in reply to SoftBonds)
Profile   Post #: 27
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 6:32:07 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel


And my questions get ignored, yet again...because "I don't read".





Well, they at least take a lower priority than making and enjoying a pleasant dinner.

It's not simply that you don't read, it that's you don't read, but still snark. See the Desert One thread, as needed.

I think there are plenty of good reasons for such an agency to exist, and that it has functions and powers which are completely legitimate for our government to have.

I've been reading something lately that brought up the study showing how some liberals simply are not capable of comprehending conservative positions. I get the feeling from our interactions that you mostly are clueless about values and belief systems other than your own, and quite happy to just believe the very worst of anyone you disagree with.

(in reply to erieangel)
Profile   Post #: 28
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 6:44:04 PM   
SoftBonds


Posts: 862
Joined: 2/10/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel


And my questions get ignored, yet again...because "I don't read".





Well, they at least take a lower priority than making and enjoying a pleasant dinner.

It's not simply that you don't read, it that's you don't read, but still snark. See the Desert One thread, as needed.

I think there are plenty of good reasons for such an agency to exist, and that it has functions and powers which are completely legitimate for our government to have.

I've been reading something lately that brought up the study showing how some liberals simply are not capable of comprehending conservative positions. I get the feeling from our interactions that you mostly are clueless about values and belief systems other than your own, and quite happy to just believe the very worst of anyone you disagree with.


Judging by my experiences as a "liberal," the same is true of some conservatives...
My grandfather is a liberal republican, my father is a conservative democrat, so I'm a liberal/conservative radical... call me a libertarian if you need to...
I have come to the conclusion that this nation cannot endure half Red and half Blue. I don't see reconciliation happening, and I don't think another civil war is a good idea (especially with all the nukes we have). I also don't like the idea that a president can declare someone a terrorist and have them "disappeared," without trial or evidence. I wish both sides of the Aisle could realize that it is better for all of us to fight for liberty than run the risk that the other party's guy will be the one who realizes that several administrations have given the presidency the power to upend the constitution and replace it with what the president believes is "right."

_____________________________

Elite Thread Hijacker!
Ignored: ThompsonX, RealOne (so folks know why I don't reply)

The last poster is often not the "winner," of the thread, just the one who was most annoying.

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 29
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 6:49:08 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SoftBonds

Judging by my experiences as a "liberal," the same is true of some conservatives...



According to this study, conservatives were much better at understanding the motivations and beliefs of liberals. You can try the test yourself, at yourmorals.org. Just pretend you are taking the test as a conservative, and see how you wind up comparing to real ones.

quote:

[University of Virginia professor Jonathan] Haidt’s research asks individuals to answer questionnaires regarding their core moral beliefs—what sorts of values they consider sacred, which they would compromise on, and how much it would take to get them to make those compromises. By themselves, these exercises are interesting. (Try them online and see where you come out.)

But Haidt’s research went one step further, asking self-indentified conservatives to answer those questionnaires as if they were liberals and for liberals to do the opposite. What Haidt found is that conservatives understand liberals’ moral values better than liberals understand where conservatives are coming from. Worse yet, liberals don’t know what they don’t know; they don’t understand how limited their knowledge of conservative values is. If anyone is close-minded here it’s not conservatives.


< Message edited by TheHeretic -- 4/28/2012 6:56:00 PM >

(in reply to SoftBonds)
Profile   Post #: 30
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 6:52:51 PM   
SoftBonds


Posts: 862
Joined: 2/10/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: SoftBonds

Judging by my experiences as a "liberal," the same is true of some conservatives...



According to this study, conservatives were much better at understanding the motivations and beliefs of liberals. You can try the test yourself, at yourmorals.org. Just pretend you are taking the test as a conservative, and see how you wind up comparing to real ones.

Um, which study, the site has about 40...

_____________________________

Elite Thread Hijacker!
Ignored: ThompsonX, RealOne (so folks know why I don't reply)

The last poster is often not the "winner," of the thread, just the one who was most annoying.

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 31
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 7:01:10 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline 		The moral foundations questionnaire.

(in reply to SoftBonds)
Profile   Post #: 32
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 7:19:39 PM   
erieangel


Posts: 2237
Joined: 6/19/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel


And my questions get ignored, yet again...because "I don't read".





Well, they at least take a lower priority than making and enjoying a pleasant dinner.

It's not simply that you don't read, it that's you don't read, but still snark. See the Desert One thread, as needed.

I think there are plenty of good reasons for such an agency to exist, and that it has functions and powers which are completely legitimate for our government to have.

I've been reading something lately that brought up the study showing how some liberals simply are not capable of comprehending conservative positions. I get the feeling from our interactions that you mostly are clueless about values and belief systems other than your own, and quite happy to just believe the very worst of anyone you disagree with.



You think that but while I identify myself as mostly liberal, I am fiscally conservative in may ways. However, those fiscal conservative views come more from the Eisenhower years than the Reagan years.

We have to stop the growth of the military industrial complex which Ike warned us about. Drones, like the ones Obama has been using in Pakistan and Yemen and other places, are coming to American cities--not my idea of a "free society".

We have to stop with this nonsense of privatizing everything under the sun. Private corporations are not going to build roads and bridges and have done a piss poor job of delivering affordable health care--look at Medicare Advantage. That program was supposed to increase options for seniors, increase outcomes and lower costs. After the first year, it did nothing but increase costs, because the for-profit insurance companies that offer the Advantage programs don't give a shit about the policy holders, only about the premiums they are collecting.

I society is not measured on the wealth of its most successful but rather on how that society cares for lesser of them. Education from public elementary to high school to public colleges and universities have been decimated in recent years, as have our infrastructure, welfare and food programs for the poor, health care programs for the poor. The Republican Congress just yesterday voted to keep interest rates low on student Stafford loans but insisted that must be paid for with the "slush fund" in the health care act meant to pay for immunizations and cancer screens for the poor.

I understand the conservative of those in politics very well...they really could give a damn about the poor. And if you vote for those yahoos you are just like them.


(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 33
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 7:22:41 PM   
erieangel


Posts: 2237
Joined: 6/19/2011
Status: offline 		As for the Desert One thread, yes I did make statement which anybody could have construed as snark in my first post. You obviously did not read my second post because I said I did not see what happened that day as a debacle, as you asserted (talk about partisan bs) but a tragedy.


(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 34
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 7:59:37 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


I get the feeling from our interactions that you mostly are clueless about values and belief systems other than your own, and quite happy to just believe the very worst of anyone you disagree with.




I understand the conservative of those in politics very well...they really could give a damn about the poor. And if you vote for those yahoos you are just like them.





The feeling is reinforced.

(in reply to erieangel)
Profile   Post #: 35
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 8:02:46 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel

As for the Desert One thread, yes I did make statement which anybody could have construed as snark in my first post. You obviously did not read my second post because I said I did not see what happened that day as a debacle, as you asserted (talk about partisan bs) but a tragedy.





That was the title of the article, Erie. Are you fucking admitting you couldn't even read the Goddamn title, before assuming you already had it figured out?


(in reply to erieangel)
Profile   Post #: 36
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 8:04:43 PM   
Mupainurpleasure


Posts: 393
Joined: 4/12/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel


And my questions get ignored, yet again...because "I don't read".





Well, they at least take a lower priority than making and enjoying a pleasant dinner.

It's not simply that you don't read, it that's you don't read, but still snark. See the Desert One thread, as needed.

I think there are plenty of good reasons for such an agency to exist, and that it has functions and powers which are completely legitimate for our government to have.

I've been reading something lately that brought up the study showing how some liberals simply are not capable of comprehending conservative positions. I get the feeling from our interactions that you mostly are clueless about values and belief systems other than your own, and quite happy to just believe the very worst of anyone you disagree with.

I comprehend. Conservatives believe we are over regulated. They have a hard time pointing to the "over" though. Bush showed us the error with the basic abdication of regulation in so many areas see Coal mining. The sad fact is corporations exst to create profit and will do incredibly destructive things without regulation see banking. A cursory look at the behavior of American companies where there is lack enforcement makes it clear they act as they do here solely because of EPA. You are up in arms at his statement which I agree was poor choice on his part yet you arent point to cases where they fined and shouldnt of. The truth is the EPA mostly lets people fix issues they are about improving enviroment not bankrupting industry. It's worth noting republicans said every major poloution reducing intiative would destroy induistry. instead it drive innovation and our air is clean and fish in the rivers again. Now frackingis becomeing an issue but seriosuly ifthere is a risk we may fill aquaifers with benezenes are we better of making sure before we destroy the water supply in huge areas of the countey. Aquifer contamination would be a national disaster Sometimes people come before business it does say we the people So rather than step back and frankly force innovation and get the carcinagens out of the fracking mix they risk our water supply. Do you think aquifer contamination is ok? Shale oil is another hot term the right throws around only if you investigate and search water shale oil extraction contamination you understand why maybe regulation and caution are good things

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 37
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 11:09:03 PM   
SoftBonds


Posts: 862
Joined: 2/10/2012
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic

The moral foundations questionnaire.


Well, I realized that it would be against my morals to lie on the survey, sorry. I did take it, and here are my results:

LOL, I got a 0 on purity, meaning that I don't care what someone else does in their bedroom (liberal average of 1.4, Conservative 2.9), I think the reason I got the Conservative score on my morality where harming was concerned is I strongly disagreed with the idea that killing others is wrong in all cases. Um, former military, duh? That said, looks like I care more about fairness even than most liberals, (my score 4.3, lib 3.8, con 3.1)
Got typical liberal scores (below conservative norms) in my feelings about loyalty and authority, the idea that someone should get away with a crime cause they are in my family is pretty immoral if you ask me. I said absolutely regarding if a soldier should follow an order they disagree with (former military again), but I don't think the punishment for a crime should be different if someone was showing disrespect for authority figures. I mean, duh, freedom of speech! Why would the punishment for libel against a politician be greater than the punishment for libel against a nurse?
Anyway, I knew that survey is being used by some grad student to try to figure out the way our brains tick, and faking results would have made his research more difficult, so I couldn't lie.

Anyway, how did this survey tell you it was harder for liberals to understand conservatives than vice versa???

< Message edited by SoftBonds -- 4/28/2012 11:12:29 PM >

_____________________________

Elite Thread Hijacker!
Ignored: ThompsonX, RealOne (so folks know why I don't reply)

The last poster is often not the "winner," of the thread, just the one who was most annoying.

(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 38
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 11:35:22 PM   
TheHeretic


Posts: 19100
Joined: 3/25/2007
From: California, USA
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: SoftBonds
Anyway, how did this survey tell you it was harder for liberals to understand conservatives than vice versa???



Tell me? Who said it was my conclusion? The researcher is Jonathan Haidt. I figure you can manage the Googling, if you are interested in what he's come up with.

(in reply to SoftBonds)
Profile   Post #: 39
RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency - 4/28/2012 11:57:47 PM   
erieangel


Posts: 2237
Joined: 6/19/2011
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


quote:

ORIGINAL: erieangel


quote:

ORIGINAL: TheHeretic


I get the feeling from our interactions that you mostly are clueless about values and belief systems other than your own, and quite happy to just believe the very worst of anyone you disagree with.




I understand the conservative of those in politics very well...they really could give a damn about the poor. And if you vote for those yahoos you are just like them.





The feeling is reinforced.



So, are you saying it's ok to raid a fund meant to provide cancer screenings and immunizations for poor people. or not? The Ryan budget calls for decreasing the SNAP program by several million and for privatizing medicare. Hannity recently said poor people should eat diets of beans and rice and seemed to suggest that would provide proper nutrition. And Romney recently told a college student that he should borrow money from his parents (money his parents don't have) to go to school.

For 30 years, Republican/conservative and neo-liberal policies have decimated the middle class; have caused our roads, bridges, schools and other public buildings to fall into disrepair; have given massive tax breaks to the wealthiest and demonized everybody who is not wealthy as lazy, stupid or unworthy. And now, for the past two years, republican elected officials at all levels of government have been demonizing public employees as being over paid with overly-generous benefit, obviously forgetting that they themselves are highly paid public employees with very generous benefits.

I don't always vote for the democrat that is running. In '04, '06 and '08 I voted for Phil English as my Congressman. I actually voted for Santorum his first run for senate (what a mistake that was) of course not for re-election. In recent years, however, I've watched the Republican party go so far to the right that it would be a long time before I would be able to able to bring myself to vote for another Republican. In fact, I would have to have a very deep distrust of the democrat.





(in reply to TheHeretic)
Profile   Post #: 40
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion >> RE: The Environmental Crucifixion Agency Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy

0.094