Well, you can never reason with radicals, so everything is moot at this point anyway.
Speaking of radicals, a segment of the right wing is organizing a march on washington to demand their country back and they claim to be drawing 10 million people, possibly up to 30 million people.
protesting nowadays doesn't work like how it used to and for the most part are just considered another form of entertainment..
Right.... No.
Protesting means you're willing to give something up for your cause. It's far easier to sit on the sidelines and be cynical than to get down in the trenches, risk being jailed, beaten or whatever the status quo can conjure up to make your life uncomfortable.
Protesting does work. You just need to be ready for some less-than-ideal circumstances.
Well, you can never reason with radicals, so everything is moot at this point anyway.
Speaking of radicals, a segment of the right wing is organizing a march on washington to demand their country back and they claim to be drawing 10 million people, possibly up to 30 million people.
Are you going to march with them?
back from what?
Do you live in a hole?
debatable, but I hear this argument quite often, yet nobody really can answer it.
I mean did the british take back their colony or something? Are we a colony of our Hat or butt? Did Red Dawn happen?
It's empty HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE rhetoric that only ignorant fools buy into.
Well, you can never reason with radicals, so everything is moot at this point anyway.
Speaking of radicals, a segment of the right wing is organizing a march on washington to demand their country back and they claim to be drawing 10 million people, possibly up to 30 million people.
Are you going to march with them?
back from what?
From the gay liberal scumbags and their Muslim caliph.
Nah, it'll be alot of different people with different reasons to protest. I imagine everything from gun rights to abortion right down the line to your batshit insane theocrats.
Well, you can never reason with radicals, so everything is moot at this point anyway.
Speaking of radicals, a segment of the right wing is organizing a march on washington to demand their country back and they claim to be drawing 10 million people, possibly up to 30 million people.
Are you going to march with them?
back from what?
From the gay liberal scumbags and their Muslim caliph.
Nah, it'll be alot of different people with different reasons to protest. I imagine everything from gun rights to abortion right down the line to your batshit insane theocrats.
protesting nowadays doesn't work like how it used to and for the most part are just considered another form of entertainment..
Right.... No.
Protesting means you're willing to give something up for your cause. It's far easier to sit on the sidelines and be cynical than to get down in the trenches, risk being jailed, beaten or whatever the status quo can conjure up to make your life uncomfortable.
Protesting does work. You just need to be ready for some less-than-ideal circumstances.
Protesting first and foremost means you don't have to work that day...
protesting nowadays doesn't work like how it used to and for the most part are just considered another form of entertainment..
Right.... No.
Protesting means you're willing to give something up for your cause. It's far easier to sit on the sidelines and be cynical than to get down in the trenches, risk being jailed, beaten or whatever the status quo can conjure up to make your life uncomfortable.
Protesting does work. You just need to be ready for some less-than-ideal circumstances.
Protesting first and foremost means you don't have to work that day...
Because you can't take a day off to champion something you believe in?
protesting nowadays doesn't work like how it used to and for the most part are just considered another form of entertainment..
Right.... No.
Protesting means you're willing to give something up for your cause. It's far easier to sit on the sidelines and be cynical than to get down in the trenches, risk being jailed, beaten or whatever the status quo can conjure up to make your life uncomfortable.
Protesting does work. You just need to be ready for some less-than-ideal circumstances.
Protesting first and foremost means you don't have to work that day...
It also means you forfeit your income to protest something you happen to be against strongly enough to say "hey, I like money, but I dislike this even more than I like my money and my job"
Well, you can never reason with radicals, so everything is moot at this point anyway.
Speaking of radicals, a segment of the right wing is organizing a march on washington to demand their country back and they claim to be drawing 10 million people, possibly up to 30 million people.
Are you going to march with them?
back from what?
Do you live in a hole?
debatable, but I hear this argument quite often, yet nobody really can answer it.
I mean did the british take back their colony or something? Are we a colony of our Hat or butt? Did Red Dawn happen?
It's empty HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE rhetoric that only ignorant fools buy into.
It could be, but what if 2-3mil people headed to Washington the day before. Do you think the number would get even bigger the next day? Could 10mil people in Washington make a difference?
Wouldn't it be awesome if 10mil people went to Washington tossed out congress and the president and we started over?
Sure it sounds HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE but hey it kinda happened before in 1775-1776.
Or, by putting two enemies in the same room, they could bludgeon each other to death, or until one gives up.
because putting two people in the same room has always had a positive outcome.
The ideal way to resolve an issue (you can confront someone and still get along, derp) is to sit them down, and talk it over calmly by finding some middle ground, and learning to respect different opinions within the context of reasonability.
"We can disagree, and be cool about it, yo" kind of works better.
Or, by putting two enemies in the same room, they could bludgeon each other to death, or until one gives up.
because putting two people in the same room has always had a positive outcome.
The ideal way to resolve an issue (you can confront someone and still get along, derp) is to sit them down, and talk it over calmly by finding some middle ground, and learning to respect different opinions within the context of reasonability.
"We can disagree, and be cool about it, yo" kind of works better.
Well, you can never reason with radicals, so everything is moot at this point anyway.
Speaking of radicals, a segment of the right wing is organizing a march on washington to demand their country back and they claim to be drawing 10 million people, possibly up to 30 million people.
Are you going to march with them?
back from what?
Do you live in a hole?
debatable, but I hear this argument quite often, yet nobody really can answer it.
I mean did the british take back their colony or something? Are we a colony of our Hat or butt? Did Red Dawn happen?
It's empty HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE rhetoric that only ignorant fools buy into.
It could be, but what if 2-3mil people headed to Washington the day before. Do you think the number would get even bigger the next day? Could 10mil people in Washington make a difference?
Wouldn't it be awesome if 10mil people went to Washington tossed out congress and the president and we started over?
Sure it sounds HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE but hey it kinda happened before in 1775-1776.
The Articles of Confederation did not end with a revolution.
Yeah first day you'll get 2-3 million, then 7 million, then maybe 125 million the third day.
The largest march in US history was for women's right and it turned out 800-1.1 million people.
Thats the point. they are saying 10mil. IF I hear of 2mil OTW, you bet your *** im getting in my Jeep and heading that way. Its not gonna be some cute little protest.
But yea if 5-6k people show up ill be surprised ><
Well then you're up there, especially considering how other people on your side answered it without feeling such sentiment.
Sentiment is for the weak and breeds sheep for followers.
What 'how other people on your side answered it without feeling such sentiment.' means is that other people on your side have answered the question without thinking there's some kind of baggage that comes along with it.
Do you know what 'baggage' means? I don't mean actual luggage.
Well, you can never reason with radicals, so everything is moot at this point anyway.
Speaking of radicals, a segment of the right wing is organizing a march on washington to demand their country back and they claim to be drawing 10 million people, possibly up to 30 million people.
Are you going to march with them?
back from what?
Do you live in a hole?
debatable, but I hear this argument quite often, yet nobody really can answer it.
I mean did the british take back their colony or something? Are we a colony of our Hat or butt? Did Red Dawn happen?
It's empty HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE rhetoric that only ignorant fools buy into.
It could be, but what if 2-3mil people headed to Washington the day before. Do you think the number would get even bigger the next day? Could 10mil people in Washington make a difference?
Wouldn't it be awesome if 10mil people went to Washington tossed out congress and the president and we started over?
Sure it sounds HELP I AM TRAPPED IN 2006 PLEASE SEND A TIME MACHINE but hey it kinda happened before in 1775-1776.
The Articles of Confederation did not end with a revolution.
FFS people I should not have to make a essay long post referencing the revolution just to make a comment. Lighten the *** up.
A very extensive report, known as the National Climate Assessment, was released earlier this week. Nothing in the report is particularly surprising, but its presentation for the general public, here, is incredibly impressive. (Not all government website releases are a disaster!)
If hardcore technical reports aren't your thing, the highlights portion of the site breaks each section down as plainly as possible, is extensively cited, and makes no secret the level of uncertainty inherent in current findings. The site is really quite fantastic, and I would encourage anyone with genuine interest, skepticism, and/or curiosity in U.S. climate change to fuck around in it for a while. (Of course, if well-substantiated, easily digestible scientific communications aren't your thing, there's always this.)
Perhaps, the most poignant message arising from the report is summarized in this quote from the article:
Quote:
The report pointed out that while the country as a whole still had no comprehensive climate legislation, many states and cities had begun to take steps to limit emissions and to adapt to climatic changes that can no longer be avoided. But the report found that these efforts were inadequate.
I don't really consider myself a policy person so... what do?
Edit: Also of note is the high diversity of those involved. Largely scientists, of course, but representative of a wide swath of interests, including some oil companies.
