ADVERTISEMENT

Kamala Harris' Thanksgiving Photo Raises Questions...

For what reason(s) would anyone who acknowledges the threat of man made climate change, and could afford to replace their fossil fuel burning stove, not do so?

No single rain drop holds itself responsible for the flood.

Meanwhile:

It turns out that the world's richest 1 percent emit about the same amount of carbon as the world's poorest two-thirds, according to an analysis from the nonprofit Oxfam International.

This means that a small sliver of global elites, or 77 million people, have produced as much carbon as the 5 billion people that make up the bottom 66 percent by wealth, per the study.

The stove issue is not related to global warming, it is a potential health risk - that was the impetus to the possible DOE recommendations.
 
  • Like
Reactions: BelemNole
Multiple liberal run states are actively moving to ban gas stoves in order to reduce global warming and save the planet.

Every aspect of that sentence is false. But given that conservatism is now faith-based, I realize having the truth pointed out will not move the needle for someone like you.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SocraticIshmael
Every aspect of that sentence is false. But given that conservatism is now faith-based, I realize having the truth pointed out will not move the needle for someone like you.
Lol, what sources are you listening to? Whatever it is, they're lying to you.



 
This is right out of the liberal Democrat playbook, do as we say not as we do.

I'll bet Newsome's and the White House kitchens both have gas stoves.

Hypocrisy is the mantra of the Democratic Party.
 
  • Like
Reactions: KFsdisciple
You and @BelemNole make sure you read the links above... every one cites climate change. I'll await an apology or admission of your ignorance on the topic.

From your link:

The law’s passage comes after a federal official’s comments on gas stoves sparked controversy earlier this year. Richard Trumka Jr., a US Consumer Product Safety commissioner, set off a firestorm when he said in January that gas stoves were a significant source of indoor pollution linked to childhood asthma, and suggested that the agency could be working to ban them in new homes. Trumka later clarified his statement, saying the agency is “not looking to go into anyone’s homes and take away items that are already there.”
 
From your link:

The law’s passage comes after a federal official’s comments on gas stoves sparked controversy earlier this year. Richard Trumka Jr., a US Consumer Product Safety commissioner, set off a firestorm when he said in January that gas stoves were a significant source of indoor pollution linked to childhood asthma, and suggested that the agency could be working to ban them in new homes. Trumka later clarified his statement, saying the agency is “not looking to go into anyone’s homes and take away items that are already there.”
Congrats, you found one line in one link not related to climate change. Now post all the lines directly pointing to CC ad reasoning for the proposed bans. Bc that's why they're doing it.
 
Congrats, you found one line in one link not related to climate change. Now post all the lines directly pointing to CC ad reasoning for the proposed bans. Bc that's why they're doing it.

Everything else in the article was the author’s characterization. That line was the actual controversy on the subject.

And New York is not multiple states.
 
You and @BelemNole make sure you read the links above... every one cites climate change. I'll await an apology or admission of your ignorance on the topic.
Gosh, I think you probably know more about the issue that started in my home state. You have shown to be a very reliable source and extremely rational in the past!
 
  • Like
Reactions: billanole
You didn't read the article discussing similar regulations oregon, Washington and California then. Yet you claim I'm ignorant... just stop posting if you don't know wtf is going on.

Yes, I did miss any reference to state level movements to ban natural gas.

And, btw, I have seen nothing to indicate this is a part of the Democratic platform, or the view of Biden or Harris - which was the supposed “point” of the OP and how we slid down to here.
 
Yes, I did miss any reference to state level movements to ban natural gas.

And, btw, I have seen nothing to indicate this is a part of the Democratic platform, or the view of Biden or Harris - which was the supposed “point” of the OP and how we slid down to here.
Yeah, it's the republicans pushing these initiatives in new York, Oregon, California and Washington.
Where's kamala from again?
It's funny how it's always the older white democrats that get most touchy about these things. I get it too, it's probably hard when the party you've supported your whole life goes completely off the rails and is run by nutjobs.
 
Yeah, it's the republicans pushing these initiatives in new York, Oregon, California and Washington.
Where's kamala from again?
It's funny how it's always the older white democrats that get most touchy about these things. I get it too, it's probably hard when the party you've supported your whole life goes completely off the rails and is run by nutjobs.

Well, that’s ironic.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SocraticIshmael
For what reason(s) would anyone who acknowledges the threat of man made climate change, and could afford to replace their fossil fuel burning stove, not do so?

No single rain drop holds itself responsible for the flood.

Meanwhile:

It turns out that the world's richest 1 percent emit about the same amount of carbon as the world's poorest two-thirds, according to an analysis from the nonprofit Oxfam International.

This means that a small sliver of global elites, or 77 million people, have produced as much carbon as the 5 billion people that make up the bottom 66 percent by wealth, per the study.
This is so classic. You make another stupid post and then one that does not support your position and then squirm profusely to try to justify what you wrote. LOL

The government put MPG and emission requirements on cars and the manufacturers screamed that it would put them out of business. You're one of the rubes who believes the propaganda.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SocraticIshmael
Yet here you are, twisting yourself all into a pretzel to defend ridiculous policy positions of a political party who couldn't give two fvcks about you.

I’m not defending those policies, and those policies are not widely held in the Democratic Party, let alone by Biden.

The GOP, however, is under the complete control of Trump and his group of despicable crazies. Your assertion about the about Democrats is pure projection.
 
Last edited:
Gosh, I think you probably know more about the issue that started in my home state. You have shown to be a very reliable source and extremely rational in the past!
Looks like you understand just how reliable and rational some folks can be.
 
Kamala really should step down to help Joe get re-elected. She is despised by nearly everyone.
Name a potential replacement that wouldn't be labeled woke, or a communist trans groomer pedophile. Some of the Righties here will cough out Amy Klobuchar's name, but they are lying.
 
  • Like
Reactions: SocraticIshmael
Name a potential replacement that wouldn't be labeled woke, or a communist trans groomer pedophile. Some of the Righties here will cough out Amy Klobuchar's name, but they are lying.
Almost anyone. She is Toxic. Hillary level hated. I will vote Joe but what a bummer knowing he won’t fulfill a 4 year term. She is simply horrific.
 
Almost anyone. She is Toxic. Hillary level hated. I will vote Joe but what a bummer knowing he won’t fulfill a 4 year term. She is simply horrific.
Hillary is a cold hearted technocrat. But, they made up lies about pizza stores and pedo rings. Don't think they won't do it to any Dem that might replace Kamala.
 
I’m not defending those policies, and those policies are not widely held in the Democratic Party, let alone by Biden.

The GOP, however, is under the complete control of Trump and his group of despicable crazies. Your assertion about the about Democrats is pure projection.
Not even two full pages and it's about gop and Trump now... good grief
 
The stove issue is not related to global warming, it is a potential health risk - that was the impetus to the possible DOE recommendations.
A likely very minor health risk compared to things like pet dander, grain dust, ragweed and tree pollen- if they’re claiming they’re doing it for asthmatic children.

Outlawing pets in homes with children present and chopping down certain tree species in populated areas would go a lot further for curbing asthma symptoms for most. In a large family full of asthmatics, I don’t recall a single asthma attack, mild or severe, ever experienced from being near a gas stove.
 
  • Haha
Reactions: RileyHawk
A likely very minor health risk compared to things like pet dander, grain dust, ragweed and tree pollen- if they’re claiming they’re doing it for asthmatic children.

Outlawing pets in homes with children present and chopping down certain tree species in populated areas would go a lot further for curbing asthma symptoms for most. In a large family full of asthmatics, I don’t recall a single asthma attack, mild or severe, ever experienced from being near a gas stove.
That's bc its bullshit and they know it. Rather than admit banning natural gas in the name of "saving the planet" bc they know it's ridiculous, they invent other health related reasons to justify how stupid their party has become.
 
Lol, what sources are you listening to? Whatever it is, they're lying to you.



Unless VP Harris took that photo in a brand new residential building, none of what you posted paints her as a hypocrite. The proposed regulations acknowledge that it's not reasonable to expect people (such as VP Harris) to go out and scrap their existing appliances.
 
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT