President Biden: The NEW one and only politics thread

I think it's a fair assumption that Maddie's campaign paid her to sign some documents and attend a ceremony alleging matrimony. Once he attained enough fame within the Trumpist/Neo Nazi klan, he no longer had to worry about election financing. The Party will take care of its boy. And if ever the Party's cash isn't enough, GoFundMe will come through. He's too big to fail. Encouraging violence against libruhls will always be an unbeatable fundraising strategy. Now his ex can go about her life.

 

And yet somehow he’s always found a way to support getting welfare for his constituents yet deny it for others. So his stated reasons appear more self serving than honest policy choices.

 

"There's no defense for it."--Frank Sinatra, "Witchcraft"

 

That's nonsense. It is not what is being claimed. He voted against unfunded supplemental relief bills and asked the president to declare a disaster area so FEMA funds could be used. Two different things that together do not support the claim of hypocrisy. You are just making a vague claim of what he may support or oppose. If he votes for further relief for Kentucky without spending offsets, you can call him a hypocrite. Otherwise, your statement is just partisan BS.

 

I would have thought Tom Cruise has probably left that much in his couch. Checked his net worth - $600m - checked his career box office $4b - is he underpaid?

 

Well, while we're on religion...

 

George Wallace managed to get a third person to marry him after he got shot.

 

Battery technology has been the weak link in electric power from the very beginning.

That said, when talking about wind and solar, the fuel itself is free.

I'd be really interested to read a book that breaks down the true and total costs over time of energy generation and transmission from the beginning of the Industrial Revolution.

Anyone written one yet?

 

The land it takes to capture wind and solar energy is not free. Especially wind.

https://www.seas.harvard.edu/news/2...more-land-and-cause-more-environmental-impact

Includes this:

The Harvard researchers found that the warming effect in the continental U.S. caused by wind turbines is actually larger than the effect of reduced emissions for the first century of its operation. This is because the warming effect is predominantly local to the wind farm, while greenhouse gas concentrations must be reduced globally before the benefits are realized.

"The direct climate impacts of wind power are instant, while the benefits of reduced emissions accumulate slowly," says Keith. "If your perspective is the next 10 years, wind power actually has--in some respects--more climate impact than coal or gas. If your perspective is the next thousand years, then wind power has enormously less climatic impact than coal or gas."

"The work should not be seen as a fundamental critique of wind power,” said Keith. “Some of wind's climate impacts will be beneficial — several global studies show that wind power cools polar regions. Rather, the work should be seen as a first step in getting more serious about assessing these impacts for all renewables.