RealGM

dobrojim wrote:Maybe I have not been paying as close attention as you...
is what you're saying the house passed 'a budget' but the
senate did not? If so, I would guess that that would be
because that it would not comport with the House passed
budget and so have no chance of becoming law, as well
as the reasons you suggest. No upside, only downside.
But I don't disagree with your basic premise, very much
anyway, that if the law requires it, they should do it.
My guess is that they met the letter of the law by
simply passing a CR.

Fair enough.

Induveca wrote:There is a reason Pentagon lightbulbs were 50 dollars each or some insane figure. I've also seen the federal government buy computer servers at 500% premium from requested local consulting firms. That wasn't a "favor" for the consulting firm.

Not "Pentagon" lightbulbs, and they don't cost $50. Philips had a contract to develop a lower cost LED replacement bulb, and it had to be manufactured and assembled in the US. Read here: http://www.triplepundit.com/2012/03/phi ... ight-bulb/
Don't buy that because it's too something or other? Just do a little original research, there are plenty of sites that flesh out the story. The only ones I saw that uncritically parroted "$50 Pentagon lightbulbs" were dull extremist sites.

Sure there's corruption, but I don't see evidence here that it exists. Maybe it's in the $10 million contract to develop the US-made bulb.

Those who gain the most from corruption (and thus have the most to lose) gain also from the perpetuation of such easily disproved stories (the toilet seat, the hammer, etc), as truth and lies merge into an indecipherable collage and everyone just gives up on research, logic, and analysis.

PS: Here it is right here @ $20.69, which is in the range of other (non-US made) 60 watt LED bulbs.

montestewart wrote:

Induveca wrote:There is a reason Pentagon lightbulbs were 50 dollars each or some insane figure. I've also seen the federal government buy computer servers at 500% premium from requested local consulting firms. That wasn't a "favor" for the consulting firm.

Not "Pentagon" lightbulbs, and they don't cost $50. Philips had a contract to develop a lower cost LED replacement bulb, and it had to be manufactured and assembled in the US. Read here: http://www.triplepundit.com/2012/03/phi ... ight-bulb/
Don't buy that because it's too something or other? Just do a little original research, there are plenty of sites that flesh out the story. The only ones I saw that uncritically parroted "$50 Pentagon lightbulbs" were dull extremist sites.

Sure there's corruption, but I don't see evidence here that it exists. Maybe it's in the $10 million contract to develop the US-made bulb.

Those who gain the most from corruption (and thus have the most to lose) gain also from the perpetuation of such easily disproved stories (the toilet seat, the hammer, etc), as truth and lies merge into an indecipherable collage and everyone just gives up on research, logic, and analysis.

PS: Here it is right here @ $20.69, which is in the range of other (non-US made) 60 watt LED bulbs.

Fair enough on the bulb, I was trying to remember a story from the 90s. That being said I could buy that bulb here for 3 dollars or so (have some in my kitchen according to my girl). Alibaba.com if you buy in bulk they go to 2.50.

The US is extremely corrupt however. Mostly at the federal level. How do I know this? I've been part of it on both sides. Just get yourself a good merc lobbyist and with enough money you can buy any favor/government approval needed in DC.

Not sure why I'm arguing this....I literally have to live this stuff. US government officials down here (Dominican Republic) are considered the most dangerous crooks of all. Embassy officials regularly shake down companies to turn a blind eye to them when US legislation is passed which may impact any questionable grants or aid they have received.

Consul officials accept huge bribes to overturn things like revoked student visas. (50k usually gets it done). 100k for business visas. But it typically must get done in higher up social circles.

I've known embassy types who enjoy million dollar beach homes held via a Dominican company, and live 25,000/month lives.

I could go on and on, but last I will just reinforce the "War on Drugs" is AMAZINGLY profitable for companies receiving aid and the local US officials granting or administering said aid.

Random stat I just saw on NHK. China currently has 937 million people who are "working age".

I don't see the US ever coming close to competing on a global manufacturing scale. The US needs a little isolationism in more industries (like their current block on Chinese cars).

More evidence as to why so many are still skeptical of global warming.

Government Scientist Gets Fired for Telling the Truth

Something’s amiss at the Department of Interior. Eight government scientists were recently fired or reassigned after voicing concerns to their superiors about faulty environmental science used for policy decisions. Which begs the question, “Are some government agencies manipulating science to advance political agendas?” ...............

http://townhall.com/columnists/davidspa ... h-n1492207

Not just that Jim, they are protecting the racket for a very powerful carbon/green lobby.

Al Gore drives the majority of it through his VC firm in Silicon Valley. They've invested close to 1 billion dollars in "green tech", of which they've sold to governments around the world.

Of course many of these products would have never gotten government funding if not for his testimony and millions in lobbying/bribe costs. Main issue is how was he treated as a "subject matter expert" concerning companies in which he was heavily invested personally?

Pathetic...

popper wrote:More evidence as to why so many are still skeptical of global warming.

Government Scientist Gets Fired for Telling the Truth

Something’s amiss at the Department of Interior. Eight government scientists were recently fired or reassigned after voicing concerns to their superiors about faulty environmental science used for policy decisions. Which begs the question, “Are some government agencies manipulating science to advance political agendas?” ...............

http://townhall.com/columnists/davidspa ... h-n1492207

Evidence for Climate change? Here's the latest draft report: http://ncadac.globalchange.gov/

Climate change is already affecting the American people. Certain types of weather events have become more frequent and/or intense, including heat waves, heavy downpours, and, in some regions, floods and droughts. Sea level is rising, oceans are becoming more acidic, and glaciers and arctic sea ice are melting. These changes are part of the pattern of global climate change, which is primarily driven by human activity

Or headlines of the report from USA Today:

• U.S. average temperature has increased by about 1.5 degrees Fahrenheit since 1895, and more than 80% of that occurred since 1980. The most recent decade was the nation's hottest on record, and the next few decades are projected to see another 2 degrees to 4 degrees Fahrenheit of warming in most areas.

• Global sea level has risen about 8 inches over the past 100 years and is projected to rise by another 1 to 4 feet this century.

• Ocean surface waters have become 30% more acidic as they absorb large amounts of carbon dioxide from the atmosphere. The acidification reduces the capacity of marine organisms with shells or skeletons made of calcium carbonate such as coral, oysters, clams and crabs to survive.

• Public health effects include waterborne diseases, increased heat stress, respiratory problems from poor air quality and diseases transmitted by insects and rodents.

Among scientists, there is no doubt except at the extreme fringe. Interestingly, about 50% of TV weathermen appear to both love lamps, AND think global warming is a hoax. This is why its rarely reported.

I like the "Global Warming v. Start of a New Ice Age" idea. It seems to make more sense than conventional global warning explanations and may account for the delay in warming numbers as well. The real trouble with believing the global warming scientists outside their own community is that they have been making predictions since the 1960s based on these models and have been consistently . . . wrong.

It's as if Hollinger's PER predicted the Wizards and Clippers playing for the NBA championship at least twice in the past decade; it tarnishes the image badly even as he tweaks it and pronounces it new and improved for the next year.

popper wrote:More evidence as to why so many are still skeptical of global warming.

Government Scientist Gets Fired for Telling the Truth

Something’s amiss at the Department of Interior. Eight government scientists were recently fired or reassigned after voicing concerns to their superiors about faulty environmental science used for policy decisions. Which begs the question, “Are some government agencies manipulating science to advance political agendas?” ...............

http://townhall.com/columnists/davidspa ... h-n1492207

Didn't read the whole article, but doesn't seem to have anything to do with global warming.

Having a ton of experience arguing with EPA over their idiotic "science" for smog and particulate matter (and industrial boiler) rules, I think it's more likely that's what the article's about. Outrageous and unforgiveable, but nothing to do with global warming.

http://tinyurl.com/b4obhjt

another reason to be moving away from fossil fuels

the above study is notable for the figure it came up with as for
the things it did NOT include which raises the costs even more.

I was a part of the White House panel of scientists and economists calculating the "social costs of carbon" to be used in environmental rules that reduce carbon emissions. The modelers bent over backwards to include everything quantifiable, but it all added up to squat -- except for increased expenditures on air conditioning in the U.S. That's the primary cost factor in the $20-$26/ton figure they came up with.

The only thing that would significantly increase the estimates is factoring in a small probability of "catastrophe," which no one has been able to put a price tag on or scientifically estimate the probability of. What we didn't factor in and we should've, but can't, is the "cost" of mass fish extinctions. Those are really hard to estimate.

I still think we should do something about global warming. It's a fact and it's our fault. But the quantifiable costs are pretty minuscule.

great new documentary done by Frontline on the failure to
prosecute Wall St for the fraud that was committed and
the underlying cause of the financial meltdown.

one of my biggest disappointments with the Obama admin

http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/view/

even if they had a difficult row to hoe re criminal prosecutions for fraud
they should at least have gone after people for criminal negligence.

Anyone catch the Salem Witch trials otherwise known as the Benghazi hearings? What a total clown show for talk radio and Faux News viewers.

closg00 wrote:Anyone catch the Salem Witch trials otherwise known as the Benghazi hearings? What a total clown show for talk radio and Faux News viewers.

Don't get me started on that.

Would love a response from Progressives here to George Will's column in today's Post (page A15).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... story.html

popper wrote:Would love a response from Progressives here to George Will's column in today's Post (page A15).

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/ ... story.html

Completely invalid conclusion from cherry picked data. Even if it wasn't, the sample he uses is too small to reach a scientifically valid conclusion. Perfect example of someone with an agenda deliberately manipulating data to support a fallacious conclusion.

The terrible thing about people like George Will is they are speaking to an audience that desperately wants to believe their lies. And there's no punishment for it - he faces absolutely no penalty to his reputation - in fact, he'll probably be rewarded for pandering to his gullible audience.

Sorry for sounding harsh, but there is nothing worse for science and rational debate than columns like that.

Don't know whether anyone here watches NBC News but if so you were continually mislead as the network fraudulently shilled for the Obama administration and all things liberal. I guess the pressure from honest news organizations in calling him out was finally too much for the parent company to continue with the charade.


NBC News president Steve Capus steps down

A couple of his more notable falsehoods:

1. During last year's presidential election, Andrea Mitchell was caught manufacturing a Romney gaffe where none existed.

2. During last year's GOP primary, Ed Schultz edited video of Texas Governor Rick Perry to make him look racist.

3. In April of last year, the "Today Show" was caught editing audio of a 9-1-1 call to make George Zimmerman look racist.

4. In August of 2009, Contessa Brewer sliced and diced a photograph so it wouldn't look like a black man attended a Tea Party carrying a firearm.

5. Just this week, NBC News maliciously edited video of a town council meeting to make it look as though Second Amendment civil rights activists heckled a parent who lost his son in Newtown.

popper wrote:Don't know whether anyone here watches NBC News but if so you were continually mislead as the network fraudulently shilled for the Obama administration and all things liberal. I guess the pressure from honest news organizations in calling him out was finally too much for the parent company to continue with the charade.


NBC News president Steve Capus steps down

A couple of his more notable falsehoods:

1. During last year's presidential election, Andrea Mitchell was caught manufacturing a Romney gaffe where none existed.

2. During last year's GOP primary, Ed Schultz edited video of Texas Governor Rick Perry to make him look racist.

3. In April of last year, the "Today Show" was caught editing audio of a 9-1-1 call to make George Zimmerman look racist.

4. In August of 2009, Contessa Brewer sliced and diced a photograph so it wouldn't look like a black man attended a Tea Party carrying a firearm.

5. Just this week, NBC News maliciously edited video of a town council meeting to make it look as though Second Amendment civil rights activists heckled a parent who lost his son in Newtown.

Not surprising. NBC shamelessly was pulling everything in their power for the left in the last election. The commercials of MSNBC's personalities talking about America, its future, and all that with regards to the election was just... smh

Uh... You have heard of Fox News, right?

Zonkerbl wrote:Uh... You have heard of Fox News, right?

Haven't you heard?

They're "fair and balanced".