Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Democrat policies
Author Message
RiceLad15 Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,640
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 108
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #2021
RE: Democrat policies
(03-17-2023 12:32 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(03-17-2023 12:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(03-17-2023 10:33 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(03-16-2023 09:28 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I criticized OO for saying that the opponents didn’t provide details on their opposition when it is pretty clear he hasn’t actually looked to see what opponents have said on the matter.

Did I say that? Where?

Even with your links, I don't see many details being provided?

Quote:My opinion is that the people opposing the road are frustratingly low (zero is low,right?) on details of how the road will be a negative impact on wildlife. The people proposing the road at least can show a positive impact on human safety.

https://csnbbs.com/thread-874891-post-18...id18847003

So your complaint about me was that I responded in kind to you AFTER you made this statement (I was hopeful that the article would actually answer that question and provide information as to why groups argued there was an environmental issue with building the road) 9 posts earlier?

Honestly, I guess you cannot tell when I am mocking you by responding in kind.

Still, it is good to know how you can be triggered by posts not yet made.

Still, the topic was Biden reversing himself. There is no lack of data on that topic.

I'm banging my head against the wall that you think my comments about the author of an article is the same as you commenting about the subjects of an article.

Saying an author should have provided more information is NOT the same as saying proponents or opponents should provide more information. The former is based solely on what was written. The latter requires a deeper understanding of the situation and what the proponents or opponents have done.
03-17-2023 12:46 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,651
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #2022
RE: Democrat policies
Instead of dueling ad hominems, what do you think should actually be done about the King Bay situation?
03-17-2023 12:49 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 58,535
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 854
I Root For: Rice
Location: DFW Metroplex

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #2023
RE: Democrat policies
(03-17-2023 12:46 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(03-17-2023 12:32 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(03-17-2023 12:19 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(03-17-2023 10:33 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  
(03-16-2023 09:28 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I criticized OO for saying that the opponents didn’t provide details on their opposition when it is pretty clear he hasn’t actually looked to see what opponents have said on the matter.

Did I say that? Where?

Even with your links, I don't see many details being provided?

Quote:My opinion is that the people opposing the road are frustratingly low (zero is low,right?) on details of how the road will be a negative impact on wildlife. The people proposing the road at least can show a positive impact on human safety.

https://csnbbs.com/thread-874891-post-18...id18847003

So your complaint about me was that I responded in kind to you AFTER you made this statement (I was hopeful that the article would actually answer that question and provide information as to why groups argued there was an environmental issue with building the road) 9 posts earlier?

Honestly, I guess you cannot tell when I am mocking you by responding in kind.

Still, it is good to know how you can be triggered by posts not yet made.

Still, the topic was Biden reversing himself. There is no lack of data on that topic.

I'm banging my head against the wall that you think my comments about the author of an article is the same as you commenting about the subjects of an article.

Saying an author should have provided more information is NOT the same as saying proponents or opponents should provide more information. The former is based solely on what was written. The latter requires a deeper understanding of the situation and what the proponents or opponents have done.

Keep banging.
03-17-2023 01:33 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 58,535
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 854
I Root For: Rice
Location: DFW Metroplex

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #2024
RE: Democrat policies
(03-17-2023 12:49 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Instead of dueling ad hominems, what do you think should actually be done about the King Bay situation?

I presume this is a question for the general audience.

Unless the environmentalists can present evidence that the the road will actually have a large impact on wildlife, especially wildlife that is endangered, , build the road, as there is no doubt it would be beneficial to the humans of the area.

Safety and welfare of humans is more important than preserving wildlife, a principle I adhere to whenever I kill a rattlesnake in my front yard.

If the worry is that it will be used commercially, make that use illegal.

Biden has taken both sides on this. I think his present stance is (a) due to listening to the complaints of a key portion of his base, and/or (b) wanting to do whatever is the opposite of Trump. Either way, it is not a decision on the merits of the project or the needs of the Alaskan natives.
03-17-2023 01:51 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RiceLad15 Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,640
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 108
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #2025
RE: Democrat policies
(03-17-2023 12:49 PM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  Instead of dueling ad hominems, what do you think should actually be done about the King Bay situation?

Get outta here with that nonsense!

Like I said, I don't have enough info to really understand the opposition - the proponents make a pretty clear and obvious case for the swap and development, but my experience with environmental impacts is that the pros for development are often more obvious and straightforward than the cons.

My take is to let the experts and the administration work it out and assume that decisions are being made that holistically evaluate both sides.
03-17-2023 02:00 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Owl 69/70/75 Online
Just an old rugby coach
*

Posts: 80,651
Joined: Sep 2005
Reputation: 3192
I Root For: RiceBathChelsea
Location: Montgomery, TX

DonatorsNew Orleans Bowl
Post: #2026
RE: Democrat policies
(03-17-2023 02:00 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  My take is to let the experts and the administration work it out and assume that decisions are being made that holistically evaluate both sides.

Letting a bunch of bureaucrats decide is the worst possible outcome.
03-18-2023 12:17 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
OptimisticOwl Offline
Legend
*

Posts: 58,535
Joined: Apr 2005
Reputation: 854
I Root For: Rice
Location: DFW Metroplex

The Parliament AwardsNew Orleans BowlFootball GeniusCrappiesDonatorsDonators
Post: #2027
RE: Democrat policies
(03-18-2023 12:17 AM)Owl 69/70/75 Wrote:  
(03-17-2023 02:00 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  My take is to let the experts and the administration work it out and assume that decisions are being made that holistically evaluate both sides.

Letting a bunch of bureaucrats decide is the worst possible outcome.


Leftists trust the government to always do what is best.

It kind of defines leftism.

Big Brother always has your best interests at heart.
(This post was last modified: 03-18-2023 10:54 AM by OptimisticOwl.)
03-18-2023 09:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
uconnbaseball Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,608
Joined: Aug 2005
Reputation: 84
I Root For: Divorce, Rivals
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #2028
RE: Democrat policies
I would give Biden credit if he started to invest in SMR's - those could help us cut down on fossil fuel use, and nuclear energy seems to have bipartisan support in Congress. China and France (I think?) are investing in portable nuclear so I see no reason why we wouldn't.
03-18-2023 05:20 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RiceLad15 Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,640
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 108
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #2029
RE: Democrat policies
(03-18-2023 05:20 PM)uconnbaseball Wrote:  I would give Biden credit if he started to invest in SMR's - those could help us cut down on fossil fuel use, and nuclear energy seems to have bipartisan support in Congress. China and France (I think?) are investing in portable nuclear so I see no reason why we wouldn't.

That got me wondering - turns out there is support from the admin. Both here and abroad:

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/...023-01-20/

https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10...708a/full/

And nuclear energy support in general: https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/08/22/what...ustry.html
03-18-2023 05:30 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
uconnbaseball Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,608
Joined: Aug 2005
Reputation: 84
I Root For: Divorce, Rivals
Location:

The Parliament Awards
Post: #2030
RE: Democrat policies
(03-18-2023 05:30 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  
(03-18-2023 05:20 PM)uconnbaseball Wrote:  I would give Biden credit if he started to invest in SMR's - those could help us cut down on fossil fuel use, and nuclear energy seems to have bipartisan support in Congress. China and France (I think?) are investing in portable nuclear so I see no reason why we wouldn't.

That got me wondering - turns out there is support from the admin. Both here and abroad:

https://www.reuters.com/business/energy/...023-01-20/

https://physicstoday.scitation.org/do/10...708a/full/

And nuclear energy support in general: https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/08/22/what...ustry.html

It’s nice to see a very rare bipartisan win in a government where bipartisan losses are becoming increasingly common. We do need a long term solution for the % of waste that cannot be recycled, but Finland has an impressive blueprint for us to follow.

Geothermal is also an option that would be palatable to most people. Sadly, it’s only usable on the west coast iirc
03-18-2023 07:05 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,278
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1284
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #2031
RE: Democrat policies
(03-16-2023 09:28 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I never attacked OO because of the article he posted - I criticized Fox News and even levied a similar criticism at the Times.

I criticized OO for saying that the opponents didn’t provide details on their opposition when it is pretty clear he hasn’t actually looked to see what opponents have said on the matter. You’ve lost the thread here, once again, and resort (once again) to personal attacks.

A) I meant the attacks toward Fox and me. You're quite literally attacking me in this post, repeatedly. Of course you will claim that you only did so in response, but the FACTS demonstrate that this is 100% untrue. Perhaps YOU should look in the mirror??

B) You're demonstrably lying that you complained about the TImes. My entire line of questioning revolved around you complaing about 'But, well, Fox News'. You then quoted the Times on the same subject... claiming you were giving me more information... i.e. that the Times provided more information. You DID say it wasn't a 'deep dive', but that isn't a criticism like you're now claiming.. It certainly wasn't a... 'well, NY Times'.

As I said up front... Most people don't know (or care about) what you know or care about, so while YOU might like a deeper dive... most people either wouldn't care or wouldn't understand it.... so it would be mostly a waste of ink... That's my opinion, supported clearly by the fact that such details certainly exist, but sources from both sides declined to provide them.

I asked you for the meaningful differences in the information provided... and you INITIALLY agreed that there wasn't much (not a deep dive)... but when I asked you to point out the differences explicitly... asking 'please' and saying 'you're right (this minor detail) SHOULD have been in the Fox story'.... and then explained (the 'knee jerk' from the right)

And you responded with a literal line by line restatement of my question... pointed out a few minute details... and a 'seriously, you don't understand the difference?'

And YOU complain about me attacking?

Part of the point I've repeatedly tried to make with you is your ridiculous sensitivity towards what others say to you... and then your complete lack of regard for you doing the same or worse.

Example #6,750, right here.... and precisely you being an entitled and arrogant prick.

Seriously, you really don't see that you do this? (see what I did there?)

(03-16-2023 09:35 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Ham, if you are convinced I’m an “entitled and arrogant prick,” why don’t you put me on ignore? Look in the mirror and ask yourself why you feel compelled to literally jump into the fray, especially in this instance where you didn’t add anything close to meaningful in your first post - you didn’t speak to any of the content or topics but rather what knee jerk reactions the left likes to have. I think you’re letting your time in the Spin Room spill over here, frankly.

Perfect example of what you do. I've repeatedly told you that I'd love to... but I can't. I'm a moderator.... so of course, you routinely act as if there must be 'some other' reason.

I've also repeatedly told you that there is no such thing as 'jumping into the fray' on a public forum. You have zero right or expectation of privacy. If you don't want people responding to things you type on here, don't type them on here. There is a PM function if you'd like to have private conversations with people. From your definition, if someone sends a group email or text and I am not the first person to respond, I'm 'jumping into the fray'.

Otherwise, physician, heal thyself. You have ZERO restrictions on your ability to put ME on ignore.
(This post was last modified: 03-20-2023 10:12 AM by Hambone10.)
03-20-2023 10:07 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
RiceLad15 Online
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 16,640
Joined: Nov 2009
Reputation: 108
I Root For: Rice Owls
Location: H-town
Post: #2032
RE: Democrat policies
(03-20-2023 10:07 AM)Hambone10 Wrote:  
(03-16-2023 09:28 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  I never attacked OO because of the article he posted - I criticized Fox News and even levied a similar criticism at the Times.

I criticized OO for saying that the opponents didn’t provide details on their opposition when it is pretty clear he hasn’t actually looked to see what opponents have said on the matter. You’ve lost the thread here, once again, and resort (once again) to personal attacks.

A) I meant the attacks toward Fox and me. You're quite literally attacking me in this post, repeatedly. Of course you will claim that you only did so in response, but the FACTS demonstrate that this is 100% untrue. Perhaps YOU should look in the mirror??

B) You're demonstrably lying that you complained about the TImes. My entire line of questioning revolved around you complaing about 'But, well, Fox News'. You then quoted the Times on the same subject... claiming you were giving me more information... i.e. that the Times provided more information. You DID say it wasn't a 'deep dive', but that isn't a criticism like you're now claiming.. It certainly wasn't a... 'well, NY Times'.

As I said up front... Most people don't know (or care about) what you know or care about, so while YOU might like a deeper dive... most people either wouldn't care or wouldn't understand it.... so it would be mostly a waste of ink... That's my opinion, supported clearly by the fact that such details certainly exist, but sources from both sides declined to provide them.

You said, Well, Fox News... and then quoted the Times... I asked you for the meaningful differences in the information provided... and you INITIALLY agreed that there wasn't much (not a deep dive)... but when I asked you to point out the differences explicitly... asking 'please' and saying 'you're right (this minor detail) SHOULD have been in the Fox story'.... and then explained (the 'knee jerk' from the right)

And you responded with a literal line by line restatement of my question... pointed out a few minute details... and a 'seriously, you don't understand the difference?'

And YOU complain about me attacking?

Part of the point I've repeatedly tried to make with you is your ridiculous sensitivity towards what others say to you... and then your complete lack of regard for you doing the same or worse.

Example #6,750, right here.

(03-16-2023 09:35 PM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Ham, if you are convinced I’m an “entitled and arrogant prick,” why don’t you put me on ignore? Look in the mirror and ask yourself why you feel compelled to literally jump into the fray, especially in this instance where you didn’t add anything close to meaningful in your first post - you didn’t speak to any of the content or topics but rather what knee jerk reactions the left likes to have. I think you’re letting your time in the Spin Room spill over here, frankly.

Perfect example of your idiocy. I've repeatedly told you that I'd love to... but I can't. I'm a moderator.
I've also repeatedly told you that there is no such thing as 'jumping into the fray' on a public forum. You have zero right or expectation of privacy. If you don't want people responding to things you type on here, don't type them on here. There is a PM function if you'd like to have private conversations with people.

Otherwise, physician, heal thyself. You have ZERO restrictions on your ability to put ME on ignore.

Great post
03-20-2023 10:13 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Hambone10 Offline
Hooter
*

Posts: 40,278
Joined: Nov 2005
Reputation: 1284
I Root For: My Kids
Location: Right Down th Middle

New Orleans BowlDonatorsThe Parliament Awards
Post: #2033
RE: Democrat policies
(03-20-2023 10:13 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Great post

THANKS!!
03-20-2023 11:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.