On Wed, 31 Jan 2018 08:15:46 -0500, "Mr. Luddite"
wrote:

On 1/31/2018 7:50 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/31/18 6:57 AM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/31/2018 6:34 AM, justan wrote:

What an uplifting speech, eh? I got a kick out of Madame Pelosi's
Â* pickle face and the Chuckster's slouching in his chair. What a
Â* bunch of babies their section of the audience was. They can't
Â* seem to handle positive leadership.


And the glares of Cory Booker and Luis Gutierrez.

Pelosi couldn't focus on what was being said.Â* She was too busy
squirming around, looking at others as if trying to judge which
way the wind was blowing.

Yeah.Â* Many of the Democrats looked like absolute fools.

I watched some of MSNBC's analysis after.Â* They had a Democrat
congressman who had invited a DOCA "Dreamer" as his guest.
The Dreamer was asked what he thought of the President's speech.
He's comments were a wish list for *exactly* what Trump had said.

The congressman was visibly nervous because the Dreamer was blowing
the whole reason he had invited him and went on to rant about how
Trump's goal to limit the number of "chain migration" candidates and
move to a merit based immigration system was anti-American.

Best line by Trump:Â* "Americans are Dreamers too."



I instead watched the movie "Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy" and two episodes
of National Geo's "Life Below Zero," about survivalists scratching out a
living in Alaska. I did watch Joe Kennedy III's rebuttal to Trump's "me,
me, me" speech. Tinker Tailor is a great genre movie.

Read as much of the transcript of Trump's SOTU as I could tolerate
without upchucking. Thought it was funny how he tried to claim he was a
united, thought it sad he had so little to say about the opioid crisis,
thought it was funny he was praising coal, considering how much that
product contributes to air pollution, thought his comments on North
Korea were disgusting, and his comments about immigrants were hateful
and way, way off base. Didn't notice whether he mentioned the threats
from Russia.

Not an uplifting SOTU.





So, you, Maxine and a few others had better things to do, huh? Maybe
she watch "Tinker Tailor" also. You could share your impressions with
each other.

I also watched Joe Kennedy III's rebuttal. Don't know much about him
but he seems to be a sincere young guy with Kennedy DNA but obviously
following the current ideology and instructions of his party. What
struck me more though was how amateur hour the presentation of his
speech was, especially following the SOTU speech by Trump. Standing on
a temporary podium in front of a small but well programmed audience
sitting on folding chairs. They would erupt in applause for almost
every other word Kennedy uttered. Looked like it took place in the
gymnasium of a vocational school in Fall River with a car with the hood
open in the background.

Point is ... I think the Democrats really blew it big time by selecting
him in this setting to deliver a rebuttal to the SOTU speech. It sorta
looked like a high school mock SOTU speech or something. They really
should have selected someone more well known and have it done in a more
appropriate setting. Again, the Dems appear to be on a rowboat without
oars. Nothing they do or say makes any sense.


I wasn't quite sure who the "response" was aimed at but he acts like
all democrats are illegal alien, transgendered, homosexuals on
welfare. That seemed to be the only ones he was speaking for.
I am not surprised they can't seem to hold on to the working class
voter. Bernie appeals to them but they went out of there way to
discredit him and his message in 2016 leaving Hillary who only seems
to appeal to the upper 95% liberals on the coasts. and the ones on
welfare.
It is really true that the parties have pretty much switched sides
since the 60s.

On 1/31/2018 11:14 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:


Trump is your evangelism. You're in the bag for him, and it makes you
nervous when everyone else doesn't share your Trump fandom.


Trump announced in his State of the Union speech that his administration
had “ended the war on beautiful, clean coal.�

It was a puzzling remark. Most of the coal plants Trump has tried to
boost are hardly clean compared with other forms of energy. In fact,
they create some of the most polluting power there is.



Rather than just regurgitating the approved position of the left
regarding coal, let's examine the real world, shall we?

First of all, coal still generates 30 percent of the energy used in the
United States. It is second only to natural gas that produces 34 percent.

Energy produced by nuclear power currently supplies 20 percent.

Renewable energy sources consisting of hydro, wind, biomass, solar and
geothermal contribute 15 percent.

"Petroleum" makes up 1 percent.

Looking forward and planning for future energy needs, the outlook for
nuclear power looks bleak. There are 61 nuke plants in operation with
one new one that came on line in 2016. Two more are being built in
Georgia despite calls to stop their construction. If completed, they
will come on-line some time in 2021 or 2022. However, the scheduled
shutdown of existing and aging nuke plants is happening faster than new
plants can be approved, permitted and built. Plus, the cost of a modern
nuke plant is incredibly expensive. So, we can't plan on that 20
percent of energy for very long.

For future planning, where will that energy deficit come from?

Renewable sources are being built anywhere land can be acquired and
permits can be obtained. But, despite technological advances especially
in solar, it's a stretch to think renewables can contribute enough to
produce as much power as coal, nuke and the 15 percent they contribute
now. Some of the sources have devastating affects on geology and other
environmental concerns.

Technological advances is being, and should continue to be developed to
keep coal in the game. Coal supplies in the United States are far more
plentiful than domestic oil or natural gas; they account for more than
90 percent of the country's fossil fuel reserves and more than 60
percent of the world's fuel reserves.

It's a planning thing ... not an idealistic brain fart.

On Wed, 31 Jan 2018 10:03:21 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

10%
of Americans who own 80% of corporate shares need more money.

I heard MSBNC say that too but what they ignore is just because most
working class Americans do not hold individual stock shares, they are
still invested in the market through their IRA and 401k plans. That
statistic they like to throw around assumes mutual funds are not
stocks.
My wife is a Trump hater too but she certainly likes the 10 grand she
made in her 401k last year.

On 1/31/2018 12:40 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jan 2018 10:03:21 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

10%
of Americans who own 80% of corporate shares need more money.

I heard MSBNC say that too but what they ignore is just because most
working class Americans do not hold individual stock shares, they are
still invested in the market through their IRA and 401k plans. That
statistic they like to throw around assumes mutual funds are not
stocks.
My wife is a Trump hater too but she certainly likes the 10 grand she
made in her 401k last year.



Like many progressive liberals Harry believes that people who are
successful in managing their finances and making money should be punished.

On 1/31/18 12:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/31/2018 11:14 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:


Trump is your evangelism. You're in the bag for him, and it makes you
nervous when everyone else doesn't share your Trump fandom.


Trump announced in his State of the Union speech that his
administration had “ended the war on beautiful, clean coal.�

It was a puzzling remark. Most of the coal plants Trump has tried to
boost are hardly clean compared with other forms of energy. In fact,
they create some of the most polluting power there is.



Rather than just regurgitating the approved position of the left
regarding coal, let's examine the real world, shall we?

First of all, coal still generates 30 percent of the energy used in the
United States.Â* It is second only to natural gas that produces 34 percent.

Energy produced by nuclear power currently supplies 20 percent.

Renewable energy sources consisting of hydro, wind, biomass, solar and
geothermal contribute 15 percent.

"Petroleum" makes up 1 percent.

Looking forward and planning for future energy needs, the outlook for
nuclear power looks bleak.Â* There are 61 nuke plants in operation with
one new one that came on line in 2016.Â* Two more are being built in
GeorgiaÂ* despite calls to stop their construction.Â* If completed, they
will come on-line some time in 2021 or 2022.Â* However, the scheduled
shutdown of existing and aging nuke plants is happening faster than new
plants can be approved, permitted and built.Â* Plus, the cost of a modern
nuke plant is incredibly expensive.Â* So, we can't plan on that 20
percent of energy for very long.

For future planning, where will that energy deficit come from?

Renewable sources are being built anywhere land can be acquired and
permits can be obtained.Â* But, despite technological advances especially
in solar, it's a stretch to think renewables can contribute enough to
produce as much power as coal, nuke and the 15 percent they contribute
now. Some of the sources have devastating affects on geology and other
environmental concerns.

Technological advances is being, and should continue to be developed to
keep coal in the game.Â* Coal supplies in the United States are far more
plentiful than domestic oil or natural gas; they account for more than
90 percent of the country's fossil fuel reserves and more than 60
percent of the world's fuel reserves.

It's a planning thing ... not an idealistic brain fart.






Try reading for content. My comment was about Trump boasting about
"ended the war on beautiful, clean coal."

Coal isn't beautiful or clean.

On 1/31/18 12:40 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jan 2018 10:03:21 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

10%
of Americans who own 80% of corporate shares need more money.

I heard MSBNC say that too but what they ignore is just because most
working class Americans do not hold individual stock shares, they are
still invested in the market through their IRA and 401k plans. That
statistic they like to throw around assumes mutual funds are not
stocks.
My wife is a Trump hater too but she certainly likes the 10 grand she
made in her 401k last year.


What is the basis for your comment about "most" working Americans, and
how does that conflict with the claim that 80% of corporate shares are
owned by 10% of Americans?

Keyser Soze Wrote in message:
On 1/31/18 12:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/31/2018 11:14 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:


Trump is your evangelism. You're in the bag for him, and it makes you
nervous when everyone else doesn't share your Trump fandom.


Trump announced in his State of the Union speech that his
administration had ?ended the war on beautiful, clean coal.?

It was a puzzling remark. Most of the coal plants Trump has tried to
boost are hardly clean compared with other forms of energy. In fact,
they create some of the most polluting power there is.



Rather than just regurgitating the approved position of the left
regarding coal, let's examine the real world, shall we?

First of all, coal still generates 30 percent of the energy used in the
United States. It is second only to natural gas that produces 34 percent.

Energy produced by nuclear power currently supplies 20 percent.

Renewable energy sources consisting of hydro, wind, biomass, solar and
geothermal contribute 15 percent.

"Petroleum" makes up 1 percent.

Looking forward and planning for future energy needs, the outlook for
nuclear power looks bleak. There are 61 nuke plants in operation with
one new one that came on line in 2016. Two more are being built in
Georgia despite calls to stop their construction. If completed, they
will come on-line some time in 2021 or 2022. However, the scheduled
shutdown of existing and aging nuke plants is happening faster than new
plants can be approved, permitted and built. Plus, the cost of a modern
nuke plant is incredibly expensive. So, we can't plan on that 20
percent of energy for very long.

For future planning, where will that energy deficit come from?

Renewable sources are being built anywhere land can be acquired and
permits can be obtained. But, despite technological advances especially
in solar, it's a stretch to think renewables can contribute enough to
produce as much power as coal, nuke and the 15 percent they contribute
now. Some of the sources have devastating affects on geology and other
environmental concerns.

Technological advances is being, and should continue to be developed to
keep coal in the game. Coal supplies in the United States are far more
plentiful than domestic oil or natural gas; they account for more than
90 percent of the country's fossil fuel reserves and more than 60
percent of the world's fuel reserves.

It's a planning thing ... not an idealistic brain fart.






Try reading for content. My comment was about Trump boasting about
"ended the war on beautiful, clean coal."

Coal isn't beautiful or clean.


I'm not sure anyone want's to have a conversation with you. Most
just want to blow a little wind up your skirt.
--
x


----Android NewsGroup Reader----
http://usenet.sinaapp.com/

On 1/31/2018 1:06 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/31/18 12:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/31/2018 11:14 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:


Trump is your evangelism. You're in the bag for him, and it makes you
nervous when everyone else doesn't share your Trump fandom.


Trump announced in his State of the Union speech that his
administration had “ended the war on beautiful, clean coal.�

It was a puzzling remark. Most of the coal plants Trump has tried to
boost are hardly clean compared with other forms of energy. In fact,
they create some of the most polluting power there is.



Rather than just regurgitating the approved position of the left
regarding coal, let's examine the real world, shall we?

First of all, coal still generates 30 percent of the energy used in
the United States.Â* It is second only to natural gas that produces 34
percent.

Energy produced by nuclear power currently supplies 20 percent.

Renewable energy sources consisting of hydro, wind, biomass, solar and
geothermal contribute 15 percent.

"Petroleum" makes up 1 percent.

Looking forward and planning for future energy needs, the outlook for
nuclear power looks bleak.Â* There are 61 nuke plants in operation with
one new one that came on line in 2016.Â* Two more are being built in
GeorgiaÂ* despite calls to stop their construction.Â* If completed, they
will come on-line some time in 2021 or 2022.Â* However, the scheduled
shutdown of existing and aging nuke plants is happening faster than
new plants can be approved, permitted and built.Â* Plus, the cost of a
modern nuke plant is incredibly expensive.Â* So, we can't plan on that
20 percent of energy for very long.

For future planning, where will that energy deficit come from?

Renewable sources are being built anywhere land can be acquired and
permits can be obtained.Â* But, despite technological advances
especially in solar, it's a stretch to think renewables can contribute
enough to produce as much power as coal, nuke and the 15 percent they
contribute now. Some of the sources have devastating affects on
geology and other environmental concerns.

Technological advances is being, and should continue to be developed
to keep coal in the game.Â* Coal supplies in the United States are far
more plentiful than domestic oil or natural gas; they account for more
than 90 percent of the country's fossil fuel reserves and more than 60
percent of the world's fuel reserves.

It's a planning thing ... not an idealistic brain fart.






Try reading for content. My comment was about Trump boasting about
"ended the war on beautiful, clean coal."

Coal isn't beautiful or clean.


Holy crap. You really are something else.

On 1/31/2018 1:07 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/31/18 12:40 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 31 Jan 2018 10:03:21 -0500, Keyser Soze
wrote:

10%
of Americans who own 80% of corporate shares need more money.

I heard MSBNC say that too but what they ignore is just because most
working class Americans do not hold individual stock shares, they are
still invested in the market through their IRA and 401k plans. That
statistic they like to throw around assumes mutual funds are not
stocks.
My wife is a Trump hater too but she certainly likes the 10 grand she
made in her 401k last year.


What is the basis for your comment about "most" working Americans, and
how does that conflict with the claim that 80% of corporate shares are
owned by 10% of Americans?


Heh. You are certainly demonstrating why you are an English major.
Logic and thinking is not your forte.

On 1/31/18 1:17 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/31/2018 1:06 PM, Keyser Soze wrote:
On 1/31/18 12:36 PM, Mr. Luddite wrote:
On 1/31/2018 11:14 AM, Keyser Soze wrote:


Trump is your evangelism. You're in the bag for him, and it makes
you nervous when everyone else doesn't share your Trump fandom.


Trump announced in his State of the Union speech that his
administration had “ended the war on beautiful, clean coal.�

It was a puzzling remark. Most of the coal plants Trump has tried to
boost are hardly clean compared with other forms of energy. In fact,
they create some of the most polluting power there is.



Rather than just regurgitating the approved position of the left
regarding coal, let's examine the real world, shall we?

First of all, coal still generates 30 percent of the energy used in
the United States.Â* It is second only to natural gas that produces 34
percent.

Energy produced by nuclear power currently supplies 20 percent.

Renewable energy sources consisting of hydro, wind, biomass, solar
and geothermal contribute 15 percent.

"Petroleum" makes up 1 percent.

Looking forward and planning for future energy needs, the outlook for
nuclear power looks bleak.Â* There are 61 nuke plants in operation with
one new one that came on line in 2016.Â* Two more are being built in
GeorgiaÂ* despite calls to stop their construction.Â* If completed,
they will come on-line some time in 2021 or 2022.Â* However, the
scheduled shutdown of existing and aging nuke plants is happening
faster than new plants can be approved, permitted and built.Â* Plus,
the cost of a modern nuke plant is incredibly expensive.Â* So, we
can't plan on that 20 percent of energy for very long.

For future planning, where will that energy deficit come from?

Renewable sources are being built anywhere land can be acquired and
permits can be obtained.Â* But, despite technological advances
especially in solar, it's a stretch to think renewables can
contribute enough to produce as much power as coal, nuke and the 15
percent they contribute now. Some of the sources have devastating
affects on geology and other environmental concerns.

Technological advances is being, and should continue to be developed
to keep coal in the game.Â* Coal supplies in the United States are far
more plentiful than domestic oil or natural gas; they account for
more than 90 percent of the country's fossil fuel reserves and more
than 60 percent of the world's fuel reserves.

It's a planning thing ... not an idealistic brain fart.






Try reading for content. My comment was about Trump boasting about
"ended the war on beautiful, clean coal."

Coal isn't beautiful or clean.


Holy crap.Â* You really are something else.

You mean because I posted something specific about a false Trump comment
and you didn't get it?