Originally posted by Blakemore
DDM: Laurie
Surtur: Fry
Clearly he hasn't taken enough vicodin
Originally posted by Blakemore
DDM: Laurie
Surtur: Fry
Clearly he hasn't taken enough vicodin
Originally posted by Blakemore
"Considering, there are a lot of renewable energies in the Caribbean, https://sciencing.com/alternative-forms-of-energy-in-the-caribbean-13636565.html and the coal industries don't wanna lose money, and nobody likes criminals, would it be feasible to put research into putting rehabilitation for criminals into worker plans regarding the environment?"Please don't just show them the link if you do look at this idea.
And yeah I get it, Nordic liberal/Georgism.
There's a less wordy and "loaded question" way of asking the same question. "Representative Crenshaw, what are your thoughts on rehabilitation programs, for inmates, and moving them into energy sector where there are clean energy opportunities?"
He may have no thoughts.
An even better way to ask a libertarian leaning representative a question like that is asking him about his ideas about CJS reform, reducing recidivism, and if there are job-rehabilitation opportunities for the energy sector. But that might be getting too far off topic and I might piss off others at work. Remember, I work in energy.
Originally posted by snowdragon
Make a youtube of the entire thing🙂 Ask him what he thinks of the articles of unity the weinsteins have come up with regarding himself and tulsi🙂
That would literally get me fired. We have very strict policies on recording meetings: you must get permission from legal with the legal ticketing system to record any meetings here at work. Also, even if you get formal approval to record the meeting, the recording is governed by data retention policies which I also helped write. 🙂
Originally posted by dadudemonWell I don't mean putting ISIS in the power plant, I mean some way of freeing up the prisons, rehabilitating lesser criminals and expanding renewable energy. But, whatever. You know more than me, I guess.
There's a less wordy and "loaded question" way of asking the same question. "Representative Crenshaw, what are your thoughts on rehabilitation programs, for inmates, and moving them into energy sector where there are clean energy opportunities?"He may have no thoughts.
An even better way to ask a libertarian leaning representative a question like that is asking him about his ideas about CJS reform, reducing recidivism, and if there are job-rehabilitation opportunities for the energy sector. But that might be getting too far off topic and I might piss off others at work. Remember, I work in energy.
That would literally get me fired. We have very strict policies on recording meetings: you must get permission from legal with the legal ticketing system to record any meetings here at work. Also, even if you get formal approval to record the meeting, the recording is governed by data retention policies which I also helped write. 🙂
Originally posted by Surtur
In all seriousness, maybe ask him how he feels about the idea of breaking up the police and teachers unions.Also bring up qualified immunity.
Rather irrelevant to our meeting. Wouldn't fly. Keep in mind, the execs will be in the room.
It needs to be energy focused.
We had a Democrat last month: Rep. Lizzie Fletcher. She was actually really cool and intelligent. I asked her one question and she liked the question. To paraphrase it: "What specifically are you doing to mend relations across the aisle and make forward progress on no-nonsense clean energy legislation?"
One thing I really really liked about Rep. Fletcher is her hammering the point home that Democrats (as well as Republicans) need to stop focusing so much on the emotions of the major points of contention and, instead, focus on the best science-based approach to solving problems. She gave an example of chemicals not allowed to be put into food because they literally killed people. That's the type of no-nonsense regulation, based on science, we should accept.
Originally posted by dadudemon
Rather irrelevant to our meeting. Wouldn't fly. Keep in mind, the execs will be in the room.It needs to be energy focused.
We had a Democrat last month: Rep. Lizzie Fletcher. She was actually really cool and intelligent. I asked her one question and she liked the question. To paraphrase it: "What specifically are you doing to mend relations across the aisle and make forward progress on no-nonsense clean energy legislation?"
One thing I really really liked about Rep. Fletcher is her hammering the point home that Democrats (as well as Republicans) need to stop focusing so much on the emotions of the major points of contention and, instead, focus on the best science-based approach to solving problems. She gave an example of chemicals not allowed to be put into food because they literally killed people. That's the type of no-nonsense regulation, based on science, we should accept.
Okay, ask him how he'd try to persuade people about the viability of nuclear energy.
There will be no civil war. That's just hyperbole. Neither group really has the power or the willpower to start a civil war. Like, what? dems are going to invade red states? Rednecks are going to invade blue states? It's all nonsense.
What there may be, if dems get control of the senate, is an expansion of the supreme court and then added states to the union, such as Washington DC, Guam and Puerto Rico, to ensure the republicans almost never able to regain control of the senate again. Both of which, surprisingly, involves a simple majority to accomplish in the Senate, and the removal of the filibuster. Controversial options but options none the less.
I don’t think it’s a war. It’s political battles but it’s not like the real civil war. I think that’s silly hyperbole to be honest with you my friend. People use the term civil war to disuade people on the opposition side from doing things they don’t like. But most people are not terribly friendly to one side or another.
Originally posted by BackFire
There will be no civil war. That's just hyperbole. Neither group really has the power or the willpower to start a civil war. Like, what? dems are going to invade red states? Rednecks are going to invade blue states? It's all nonsense.What there may be, if dems get control of the senate, is an expansion of the supreme court and then added states to the union, such as Washington DC, Guam and Puerto Rico, to ensure the republicans almost never able to regain control of the senate again. Both of which, surprisingly, involves a simple majority to accomplish in the Senate, and the removal of the filibuster. Controversial options but options none the less.
Correct. I was promised by several Rightwingers that we'd have the second civil war under Obama and because of Obama and we still managed to survive the Obapocalypse without CWII happening. I know certain types of people pray there will be another CW, ut that's just because they want an excuse to shot fellow Americans with different viewpoints.
The SC expansion I can't get behind, leave it at nine. PR definitely needs to become a state and Puerto Ricans need to stop being second class citizens like they are now. Same with Guam. I could see an argument for DC. Biden should definitely push for this if the Senate and House go/stay Blue in his first four years.