 |
Nope. THIS is your quote. "And I'd be singing hymns in heaven without illegals." There was no "most likely" involved in it. Now you are trying to back out of your quote. I guess it just is what it is. We can talk about something else since your statement remains totally unexplained and really suspect.
https://www.askmehelpdesk.com/showth...20#post3863320
And I did not say how they helped, did I.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
It's all good. I'll just assume there is some truth there somewhere. Still, I'm glad you received help and survived. I'm sure you are grateful to those who helped you.
On day one, Biden kills the Keystone pipeline project. 11,000 jobs go up in smoke and for what? A strictly symbolic move designed to placate the left wing environmental extremists in the dem party. It will accomplish precisely nothing other than the destruction of high paying jobs.
https://www.npr.org/sections/inaugur...ne-xl-pipeline
Farmers and natives are hardly extremists and have been fighting this pipeline from the beginning going through the land they live on. Losing a 1000 jobs many temporary construction jobs is regrettable.
Second time the project has been killed. First by Obama. Then Trump, in his never-ending hatred of anything Obama, re-instated it.
There are pros and cons in every project to consider.
13 Pros and Cons of Tar Sands – Vittana.org
Quote:
The pros and cons of tar sands show us that short-term gains happen, but at the expense of long-term problems. We must work to find a solution that will limit emissions and habitat damage to benefit from this natural resource. If we cannot find this solution, we may run out of bitumen one day and leave a more polluted planet for future generations.
Funny how liberal dems claim to care so much about the welfare of others, but then have no problem with destroying their jobs for no good reason whatsoever.
Was that a dufus fart by way of SDJL?Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
The project has been controversial for its environmental impact and the effect on tribal lands. Workers are not local to the pipeline but are mostly from Wisconsin.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
From https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/polit...cid=uxbndlbing
Resources Defense Council says the tar sands mines dig up and flatten forests to get access to the oil, destroying wildlife habitats.
"They deplete and pollute freshwater resources, create massive ponds of toxic waste and threaten the health and livelihood of the First Nations people who live near them."
The tar sands are in Canada. The petroleum they contain is going to be extracted and sold to someone. All we have done is cause the investment of hundreds of millions of dollars to be wasted and thousands of good American jobs to be lost, and all sacrificed on the altar of environmental correctness for airheads like AOC.
Trudeau is less than pleased at his counterpart south of the border . This is all BS anti-environmental and political patronage of the grossest kind .. The safest way to transport oil is pipeline . There are millions of miles of pipeline in the US and the Keystone is mostly complete .
The Canadian oil is going to make it to US refineries one way or the other .Alberta oil is already flowing in the sections of the Keystone already completed . But more capacity is needed .
If not by pipeline then it will come to the US by truck or rail . Both are much riskier of spillage than a pipeline .
But who controls the rail? You got it ......billionaire Quid supporter Warren Buffett . Buffett admits that the pipeline is the safer alternative . But if Quid is going to help direct business his way then who is he to object ?
What will this cost the US ? According to the Chamber of Commerce the pipeline will :
- Produce 20,000 well-paying jobs during manufacturing and construction;
- Increase personal income for all America workers by $6.5 billion during the lifetime of the project.
- Generate an estimated $138.4 million in annual property tax revenue for state governments and local entities where the pipeline is located;
- Create $585 million in new taxes for communities among the pipeline route;
- Create more than $5.2 billion in property taxes during the lifetime of the pipeline.
- Generate additional private sector investment of around $20 billion on food, lodging, fuel, vehicles, equipment, construction supplies and services.
But let's go for imaginary climate and environmental benefits over real employment . That is how Quid ,the champion of the working class will conduct business,
When you have convinced yourself that there is an endless supply of borrowed money just waiting to be spent, then your bulleted points lose all meaning. They are only meaningful to responsible people, and those are in short supply in D.C.Quote:
- Produce 20,000 well-paying jobs during manufacturing and construction;
- Increase personal income for all America workers by $6.5 billion during the lifetime of the project.
- Generate an estimated $138.4 million in annual property tax revenue for state governments and local entities where the pipeline is located;
- Create $585 million in new taxes for communities among the pipeline route;
- Create more than $5.2 billion in property taxes during the lifetime of the pipeline.
- Generate additional private sector investment of around $20 billion on food, lodging, fuel, vehicles, equipment, construction supplies and services.
There was a time when dems wanted to spend tax revenues on welfare and repubs wanted to spend those same revenues on the military. Dems wanted to raise taxes on the wealthy and repubs wanted lower taxes across the board. Now, with borrowed money widely accepted by a dull and thoughtless electorate, there is no longer any real consideration of tax revenues. "I want my check" is the new national motto.
The party in charge actually believes that silliness such as this is really important. "Within the proposals are the creation of the “Select Committee on Economic Disparity and Fairness in Growth,” which would require Congress to “honor all gender identities by changing pronouns and familial relationships in the House rules to be gender neutral.”
In clause 8(c)(3) of rule XXIII, gendered terms, such as “father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, half sister, grandson, or granddaughter” will be removed.
Fact check: House rules only changed gendered language in one document (usatoday.com)
The changes to gendered language only apply to the text of Rules of the House; no terms were banned
It's true that the Rules of the 117th Congress include changes to gendered language. But they don't "ban" the terms from use in the House. The change only alters the text of Standing Rules to strike gender-specific language and replace it with gender-neutral language.
The rules package would "revise certain official language but would not prevent the use of gendered language," explains a report by The Hill.
Let's look at the example from the graphic on Fox News.
The change only applies to the language in Clause 8(c)(3) of Rule XXIII, which is the Code of Official Conduct for the House. The rule states that "a member, delegate, or resident commissioner may not retain the relative of such individual in a paid position." That clause is listed at the bottom of the Fox News graphic.
Clause 8(c)(3) specifies what individuals the rule includes in the term "relative."
Previously, the clause defined "relative" as "father, mother, son, daughter, brother, sister, uncle, aunt, first cousin, nephew, niece, husband, wife, father-in-law, mother-in-law, son-in-law, daughter-in-law, brother-in-law, sister-in-law, stepfather, stepmother, stepson, stepdaughter, stepbrother, stepsister, half brother, half sister, grandson, or granddaughter."
Now, the clause will define "relative" as "parent, child, sibling, parent’s sibling, first cousin, sibling’s child, spouse, parent-in-law, child-in-law, sibling-in-law, stepparent, stepchild, stepsibling, half-sibling, or grandchild."
Other changes to the text of the Rules of the 117th Congress include switching the term "seamen" to "seafarers," the word "Chairman" to "Chair," and the phrase "himself or herself" to "themself."
It's false to suggest that any of these words have been widely banned; they have simply been switched in the text of one document, the Rules of the House of Representatives.
"Its consequences were limited to that document alone, and would have no bearing on the continued ability of House members to use gender-specific language in drafting legislation and resolutions, making speeches, or conducting a debate," reads a fact-check by Snopes.
Tessica Glancey, a spokesperson for Fox News, directed USA TODAY to examples of the network's reporting that acknowledges the limited scope of the changes.
On Jan. 14, Steve Doocy — a co-host of "Fox & Friends," the program that aired the graphic — told viewers "these changes only apply to the rules document and do not prevent the House members from using gendered language."
A story on Fox News also notes, "There's nothing in the rules that prohibit members from using gender-specific terms when speaking on the House floor or conducting business."
But many social media posts that include the Fox News graphic do not present the news with that context, seeing the change as an outright ban on the use of the words.
McGovern has condemned the criticism of the change.
"It’s mind-blowing that some people have found it controversial to say ‘parents’ instead of listing ‘mother and father," he said. "Only in Congress would it be a scandal to be succinct. We are being inclusive, efficient, and accurate."
The sky is not falling!
I am not as much concerned abouht Madam Mim's silliness when I compare it to Quid's EO that effectively ends woman's sports at the high school and collegiate levels .
Any school that receives federal funding must either allow biological boys who self identify as girls onto girls’ sports teams or face administrative action from the Education Department.
Executive Order on Preventing and Combating Discrimination on the Basis of Gender Identity or Sexual Orientation | The White HouseQuote:
“Children should be able to learn without worrying about whether they will be denied access to the rest room, the locker room, or school sports."
The bathroom issue is one thing that is bad enough . But we have already seen that biological women cannot compete in the athletic arena with biological men .Women's sports records are dropping like flies to men competing in women sports .
It's just amazing that things that would have been prohibited by common sense just a few years ago are now being put in as the equivalent of law.Quote:
Any school that receives federal funding must either allow biological boys who self identify as girls onto girls’ sports teams or face administrative action from the Education Department.
Solution: Schools have athletic teams made up of both boys and girls. (I was a fantastic pitcher so was allowed to play on the boys' team in grade school -- like Missy Cooper on "Young Sheldon". I remember girls' basketball in high school. When we possessed the ball, we were allowed to dribble it only three times, then had to pass it to another player on our team. Stupid rule!)
Result. The vast, vast majority of girls would not be playing. You played baseball in elem. school. I've watched high school sports hundreds of times as an administrator. The girls would be, in nearly all cases, hopelessly outclassed and would not be playing. And thankfully, girls play under the same rules now as boys. In fact, that changed just after I left high school.Quote:
Solution: Schools have athletic teams made up of both boys and girls.
no more Jackie Joyner, Althea Gibson and Wilma Rudolph
Not if ALL boys and ALL girls were together on teams.Quote:
Originally Posted by jlisenbe
| All times are GMT -7. The time now is 01:02 PM. |