DieHardBrownsFan Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldBrownsFan Posted December 11, 2016 Report Share Posted December 11, 2016 Don't know much about him but at least he isn't Mitt Romney. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 This is one of trumps picks that prbably wont pass. Theres enough republicans that are skeptical. Heres tllerson getting the order of lenin from putin https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1000/1*AuW_uc1pYXZCVB9INZlAAA.jpeg Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 I would imagine that the guy who has spent so many years running the largest or at least one of the largest International corporations on Earth would have enough experience for the job. Our current secretary of state is a carpetbagger who did little more than win a popularity contest as New York senator who came to fame because her husband got a b****** in the White House. But it makes some of you feel hip to hate oil companies and or corporations. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DieHardBrownsFan Posted December 12, 2016 Author Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 But it makes some of you feel hip to hate oil companies and or corporations. WSS Hating the people that do this..http://www.sightline.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/EPAoilspillcreek6.jpg And this...http://siberiantimes.com/PICTURES/ECOLOGY/Oil-spills-in-Siberia-Greenpeace/inside_dead_forest_in_oil.jpg And this..http://assets.inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2010/09/BP-Stops-Oil-3.jpg Is about beingb"hip"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 But according to our incoming president the regulations that these oil companies flaunted that could have prevented this shit stain on the record of human society....are just too burdensome. So the next time this happens the oul companies will face even less liability. The one and only thing that keeps them halfway honest are the sanctions that come down from govt. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Hating the people that do this..http://www.sightline.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/EPAoilspillcreek6.jpg And this...http://siberiantimes.com/PICTURES/ECOLOGY/Oil-spills-in-Siberia-Greenpeace/inside_dead_forest_in_oil.jpg And this..http://assets.inhabitat.com/wp-content/blogs.dir/1/files/2010/09/BP-Stops-Oil-3.jpg Is about beingb"hip"? Yes. And stupid.Okay we hate oil companies because there have been accidents within the industry. Fair enough, should we hate the nuclear energy industry? I realized some on the left do. I'm too lazy to look up the number of automobile deaths over the past year but I'm sure it's substantial. Does that mean that an automotive executive is unqualified? WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bbedward Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 People don't care about the oil CEO thing, they don't like him because he's too friendly with Russia and we need someone that'd start ww3 with Russia instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 I can only imagine what's going through Cal's mind at the pro-russian republican government taking shape. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 I can only imagine what's going through Cal's mind at the pro-russian republican government taking shape. Well after careful consideration, he now loves it and will defend it to the death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Yes. And stupid. Okay we hate oil companies because there have been accidents within the industry. Fair enough, should we hate the nuclear energy industry? I realized some on the left do. I'm too lazy to look up the number of automobile deaths over the past year but I'm sure it's substantial. Does that mean that an automotive executive is unqualified? WSS Urtalking about companies that were shown to deliberately flaunt regulations and then fought in court to deny responsibility either in part or sometimes in whole. So ur analogy is yet again lacking. We should abs hate irresponsible mkt players. If u fuck up own it and make it right, did ur parents skip that lesson to young steven? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Skirt regulations? Which regulations are those? Don't worry we can wait why you scour the alt left media to find some supposed outrage. And yes I would expect anyone facing the federal version of a slip and fall attorney to mount a vigorous defense. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Ok well its obvious you just didnt pay attention to oil spulls otherwisebyou'd have read how each time there was some preventable accident and/or a quick fix that couldnt happen becausevthey didnt have the equipment on standby that they werecrequired to have and flat out assured regulators they had ala the bp gulf spill. Im not in the habit of educating grown men like wmthey're 1st graders getting one of their first lessons on cause and effect. No interest. Educate yourself on what the rest of us already know Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Ok well its obvious you just didnt pay attention to oil spulls otherwisebyou'd have read how each time there was some preventable accident and/or a quick fix that couldnt happen becausevthey didnt have the equipment on standby that they werecrequired to have and flat out assured regulators they had ala the bp gulf spill. Im not in the habit of educating grown men like wmthey're 1st graders getting one of their first lessons on cause and effect. No interest. Educate yourself on what the rest of us already know I don't hyperventilate over oil spills and don't think there are any glaring omissions only the fact that s*** happens. Any accident that occurs in this world from falling off a stepladder in your kitchen to driving your car in front of an 18-wheeler has some sort of safety precaution that would have prevented it. The Exxon Valdez was blamed on what? You can look it up if you want. Then tell me if that's what caused the spill. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 http://www.evostc.state.ak.us/%3FFA=facts.QA Thats just one incident, the valdez, providing that easily obtainable link is as far as im willing to go to div st you of ur profound state if ignorance. You are uneducated and profoundly ignorant on almost every subject you speak for f. I could provide a link for each incident detailing the institutional failings that led to the accident. But t as i said this is as far as im willing to go, i come here assume ng the basics out of people. Im not in a childrens forum Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 actually, no, i wanted John Bolton. It does't mean, though, that we won't pizz russia off. It just means, I believe, that we will know they will be, ahead of time. something like that. what was that old saying, "keep your friends close, and your enemies closer.." ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Rand paul made a good case against bolton over the weekend. Any sec of state nominee that has bolton on staff will have a small coalition of republicans defect. Enough to cancel the republican majority. Bolton is a non starter and a deal breaker not just to democrats. Paul went over some of boltons statements and policy beleifs and pauls right, bolton has no business anywhere near the state dept Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
calfoxwc Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 if Rand is against it, it's a good thing that everybody else shouldn't be against it, all too often. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Westside Steve Posted December 12, 2016 Report Share Posted December 12, 2016 Will Bolton does fit better into the neocon interventionist category. That hasn't been Donald Trump's Focus so far. WSS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted December 14, 2016 Report Share Posted December 14, 2016 As someone who works at an energy firm, I don't hate this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted December 14, 2016 Report Share Posted December 14, 2016 As someone who works at an energy firm, I don't hate this. You think he'll have the backs of energy firms because he's head of an energy company? I can see that. Meanwhile, how's that swamp-draining, no-special-interests government coming along? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted December 14, 2016 Report Share Posted December 14, 2016 Here's something that surprises me - Rex Tillerson is in favour of the Paris climate deal: http://corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/company/news-and-updates/speeches/the-value-of-partnerships-in-delivering-energy-for-the-future “At ExxonMobil, we share the view that the risks of climate change are serious and warrant thoughtful action. Addressing these risks requires broad-based, practical solutions around the world.” “Importantly, as a result of the Paris agreement, both developed and developing countries are now working together to mitigate greenhouse gas emissions, while recognizing differing national responsibilities, capacities and circumstances. The best hope for the future is to enable and encourage long-term investments in both proven and new technologies, while supporting effective policies.” Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted December 14, 2016 Report Share Posted December 14, 2016 Because large corporations like exxon can skirt and or buy their way out of potential regulations that would cripple the smaller players. Just guessing i dont really know for sure, but thats how it works everywhere else. The oligarchs are usually unperturbed Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted December 14, 2016 Report Share Posted December 14, 2016 You think he'll have the backs of energy firms because he's head of an energy company? I can see that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LogicIsForSquares Posted December 14, 2016 Report Share Posted December 14, 2016 Because large corporations like exxon can skirt and or buy their way out of potential regulations that would cripple the smaller players. Just guessing i dont really know for sure, but thats how it works everywhere else. The oligarchs are usually unperturbed Bingo! Large energy firms will sometimes play with the idea that they back climate change regulations....because they are the only ones financially capable of staying financially sound after complying with the regulations. Government assisted monopolies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted December 14, 2016 Report Share Posted December 14, 2016 Bingo! Large energy firms will sometimes play with the idea that they back climate change regulations....because they are the only ones financially capable of staying financially sound after complying with the regulations. Government assisted monopolies. Sigh. Well at least someone gets it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Clevfan4life Posted December 14, 2016 Report Share Posted December 14, 2016 Bingo! Large energy firms will sometimes play with the idea that they back climate change regulations....because they are the only ones financially capable of staying financially sound after complying with the regulations. Government assisted monopolies. I would also add that they know they have the right contacts to just avoid compliance altogether Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gftChris Posted December 14, 2016 Report Share Posted December 14, 2016 Bingo! Large energy firms will sometimes play with the idea that they back climate change regulations....because they are the only ones financially capable of staying financially sound after complying with the regulations. Government assisted monopolies. To be honest, if the regulations are sound themselves, not being able to comply with them should be a problem. If the only way you can make money is by disregarding environmental consequences, then we don't really want that energy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.