brenthutch

Do you really think that Governor Brown would ever let that happen? I never said no regulations.

I share that I am glad that the new administration has shown a willingness to take a second look at overly burdensome EPA regulations, that somehow translates into burning rivers in the brains of many on this thread, yourself included.

No-one said it would. That kind of strawman rhetoric is just one of the reasons everyone laughs at you "This is why my colleague James Hansen has characterized approval of the pipeline as tantamount to "game over for the climate"" Michael Mann, Climate Scientist. Yeah, as I was saying...

Just how does approving the Keystone XL pipeline cause rivers to ignite? This hyperbolic, "the sky is falling," rhetoric, is just one of the many reasons I laugh at lefties. How in the world do you ever expect to be taken seriously.

Not for the NRA and the gun/ammo industry. But great for the gun owner/citizen.

Don't you ever get tired of being wrong?

The bad effects will may or may not show up, however the positive effects of deregulation will manifest immediately.

Who said anything about drinking water?

Undoing regulations is easy, just stop regulating, cut the budgets of regulatory agencies and bury the opposition in the courts. Regulating is much harder, just ask Obama about his Clean Power Plan.

I do expect that much of the Republican agenda (as opposed to the Trump agenda) will be automatic. Removing billions of dollars of economy stifling regulation can be done quickly with nothing more than a pen and a phone.

is what the Dems will be doing, starting tomorrow. Powerless to stop Trump's Cabinet appointments and the dismantling of Obama's legacy, Democrats will be dependent upon a friendly press to slow down Republicans. This will fail of course, because the press and the left wing outrage machine will be too distracted by Trump's latest tweet to put up any credible opposition. I'm going to need a bigger bag of popcorn.

It pales in comparison to your petty jealousy.

Let us stop sniping at each other (no pun intended) and celebrate the drop in firearm prices and the ubiquitous availability of ammo. I think we can all agree that is a good thing.

Just because the US intelligence community chooses not to divulge its methods and technical capabilities to YOU, terrorists and hostile nations, doesn't mean no evidence exists. They do provide evidence to the relevant committees of both Senate and House, members of which have security clearances. Sometimes we just have to believe that even Republican congresspersons do their jobs. That is what I thought about WMD in Iraq. What they divulged to the public was so weak, I KNEW, they were sitting on a smoking gun and where just protecting sources and methods. At it turned out I was wrong.

What is the difference between "gun control" and "sufficient common sense gun safety laws?"

This is delicious to watch from a safe distance. When America spits, Canada swims.

They should look up the term "pyrrhic victory". I looked it up and here is the definition http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/14/obamas-legacy-democratic-losses-party-chaos/ A Pyrrhic victory is a victory that inflicts such a devastating toll on the victor that it is tantamount to defeat. Someone who wins a Pyrrhic victory has been victorious in some way. However, the heavy toll negates any sense of achievement or profit. In other words, the Obama presidency. The Dems win the "first black presidency" and loose the White House, House of Representatives , the Senate, double digit losses in governors mansions, 900+ losses in state legislatures. With ten Democratic senators up for reelection in red states in 2018, Republicans are looking at a filibuster proof senate, not to mention a Supreme Court packed with conservatives. It doesn't get more pyrrhic than that.

They should look up the term "pyrrhic victory". I looked it up and here is the definition http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2016/nov/14/obamas-legacy-democratic-losses-party-chaos/

Different thread, I must have missed it.

No. He didn't. He won by one of the SMALLEST Electoral College margins in the history of US Presidential elections. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electoral_College_(United_States) But don't let facts get in the way. "At this point, what difference does it make?" HRC

I don't see Trump involving himself in policy, he will leave that to McConnell, Ryan and his cabinet. He will buzz about playing up the good, playing down the bad and reminding everyone how awesome he is. I don't see him getting into the weeds on anything.

You mean like this. https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=DozSvGHW160

We are not attacking you, we are laughing at you.

You're funny. Clinton won California without trying. Of course she knew it didn't matter how much she won by, and that the popular vote didn't matter. That's why she didn't campaign in California Or Wisconsin

All very true, now let us get back to saving the snowflakes.