Path: ...!Xl.tags.giganews.com!local-1.nntp.ord.giganews.com!news.giganews.com.POSTED!not-for-mail NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:13:27 +0000 From: BTR1701 Newsgroups: rec.arts.tv Subject: Re: Cruz Destroys Gender Activist Judge During Hearing References: <_qidnWbvU5joYdL7nZ2dnZfqn_qdnZ2d@giganews.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=fixed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit User-Agent: Usenapp/0.92.2/l for MacOS Message-ID: Date: Mon, 10 Jun 2024 17:13:27 +0000 Lines: 234 X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com X-Trace: sv3-Xd3FfEEteFszp8cjVygimNq00SWwy4DR2ImEYNKiuFW5iW4asiA6LEUk1fRjEYYjfk7t36KmGOE5vOL!oHnSE9mGUjvBQWLE74Lg5wl930ua2EL7hgmRbzXlFuh+kbioYm/A6Q+HmcRQy2Rrpri6NqQWI4Kl X-Complaints-To: abuse@giganews.com X-DMCA-Notifications: http://www.giganews.com/info/dmca.html X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly X-Postfilter: 1.3.40 Bytes: 12151 X-Original-Lines: 208 On Jun 10, 2024 at 4:21:06 AM PDT, "FPP" wrote: > On 6/8/24 9:48 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >> On Jun 7, 2024 at 5:51:24 AM PDT, "FPP" wrote: >> >>> On 6/4/24 5:09 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>> On Jun 4, 2024 at 8:25:10 AM PDT, "FPP" wrote: >>>> >>>>> On 6/3/24 10:35 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>> In article , FPP >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> On 6/3/24 2:22 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>> In article , FPP >>>>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> On 6/2/24 10:05 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>>>>>> FPP wrote: >>>>>>>>>>> On 6/2/24 3:26 PM, BTR1701 wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> So when you said you don't talk about another state's governor because >>>>>>>>>>>> he doesn't affect your life... that was... wait for it... a lie. >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> How does eating out affect my life? >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> Now, trying to destroy capitalism and education in the country is >>>>>>>>>>> another matter. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Your own words: another state's governor doesn't affect my life. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Weird how you're now claiming some governors have the power to >>>>>>>>>> do exactly >>>>>>>>>> that by "destroying capitalism and education" throughout the entire >>>>>>>>>> country by signing laws that only apply to their respective states. How >>>>>>>>>> does DeSantis signing an education bill that only applies to Florida >>>>>>>>>> affect your life, Effa? >>>>>> >>>>>> Still no answer here. >>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> But for some reason when Newsom signs laws, according to Effa the Hutt, >>>>>>>>>> he only has the power to affect California, despite the fact >>>>>>>>>> that in many >>>>>>>>>> cases, he actually does affect the whole country with his bullshit. Like >>>>>>>>>> when he banned all gas-powered vehicles by 2035. That affects the whole >>>>>>>>>> country because California is such a large percentage of the car market, >>>>>>>>>> vehicle manufacturers conform their products to California standards >>>>>>>>>> regardless of where they'll eventually be sold. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Newsom went out to eat. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Newsom did exactly what Cruz did that gets your panties in a twist: he >>>>>>>> went on vacation while his state was in crisis. And he did it twice. >>>>>>>> Cruz only did it once. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> DeSantis is destroying a state. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Not your state. Doesn't affect your life. Your words. >>>>>> >>>>>>> Nope. False equivalence. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Newsom owned up to it. >>>>>> >>>>>> Newsom never 'owned up' to fleeing the state for vacation. Once he got >>>>>> caught, he admitted his maskless indoor dining at the French Laundry was >>>>>> wrong. But he never gave a mea culpa for being on vacation in Cabo while >>>>>> he his state was on fire. >>>>>> >>>>> You guys caused the fires, ignoring climate change. >>>> >>>> To quote our newest Hutt: Nope. >>>> >>>> This nonsense that the California wildfires are due to 'climate change' is >>>> ridiculous. Even Emperor Newsom has admitted that historically bad forest >>>> management at both the federal and state level is a major factor in the >>>> severity and frequency of the most recent wildfires. >>>> >>>> Anyone who thinks that if we'd all just installed more solar panels and >>>> rode >>>> our bikes to work, that the state wouldn't be on fire every year is >>>> completely >>>> delusional. And these idiotic media reporters and politicians who keep >>>> saying >>>> that the amount of acreage burned in California in 2019-- the worst fire >>>> year >>>> (2.2 million acres)-- is 'record-breaking' and 'unprecedented' are >>>> bald-faced >>>> liars. It's fucking factually completely untrue. >>>> >>>> Before the 1800s, California would see anywhere from 5 to 14 million acres >>>> burn EVERY YEAR. That's 12% of the state burning every year. Before there >>>> were >>>> any SUVs or 'climate change'. Just as there were massive droughts in >>>> California long before the era of 'climate change'. California had a >>>> 500-year >>>> drought between 800 and 1300 AD. These are documented scientific facts, >>>> but >>>> that undermines the Agenda, so we get flat-out lies from politicians >>>> claiming >>>> this is unprecedented, which goes completely unchallenged by their media >>>> lackeys. >>>> >>>> Excess timber comes out of a forest in only one of two ways. It's either >>>> carried out or it burns up. We used to carry it out. It was called >>>> logging. >>>> We >>>> had healthy forests and a thriving timber economy. Then in the 70s, we >>>> began >>>> imposing a shit-ton of environmental laws-- both at the state and federal >>>> level-- that have made it all but impossible and wildly unprofitable to >>>> carry >>>> out that timber and what we've seen over those decades is increasingly >>>> severe >>>> forest fires. >>>> >>>> We've had an 80% decline in timber harvested out of California forests >>>> since >>>> 1980 and we've had 85% increase in acres destroyed by fire over that same >>>> period. The mismanagement has gotten to the point where you can tell the >>>> boundary between private forestland that is not affected by these laws and >>>> the >>>> public lands that are. The burn scars follow the property lines almost >>>> exactly >>>> in many cases. >>>> >>>> Wow, the climate sure is clever to only change over the public lands and >>>> burn >>>> them while leaving the private lands alone, isn't it? >>>> >>>> An untended forest will grow and grow until it chokes itself off. When >>>> there >>>> are too many trees for the land to support, they start dying off, and that >>>> dead timber becomes thousands of square miles of fuel, just waiting to be >>>> set >>>> ablaze. California currently has four times the timber density that the >>>> land >>>> can support. Even the reliably leftist L.A. Times, which never misses an >>>> opportunity to blame something bad on 'climate change', noted that >>>> there are >>>> currently more than 150 million dead trees in the Sierra Nevada, just >>>> waiting >>>> to be ignited. That's how nature manages a forest and if we don't want >>>> half >>>> the state on fire, we have to do something other than nature's way. >>>> >>>> That's why we started the Forest Service to begin with-- to scientifically >>>> manage the forests so that they're both preserved for people's use and to >>>> keep >>>> them healthy and reduce fires to a minimum. And we had healthy forests for >>>> decades. But then the enviro-kooks came along and said "You're interfering >>>> with nature! Stop it!" and got all sorts of laws passed requiring a >>>> hands-off >>>> approach to forestry and now here we are, with the entire West Coast >>>> frequently ablaze. >>>> >>>> The Native American tribes understood this and would routinely both clear >>>> away >>>> dead trees and brush from around their settlements and villages and >>>> conduct >>>> controlled burns to reduce the possibility of large out-of-control fires. >>>> Then >>>> came the white environmentalists, who dismissed the practices of those >>>> they >>>> considered ignorant savages, and decided they knew better how to do >>>> things. >>>> Well, we're seeing how well that worked out, huh? >>>> >>>> But no, we're still having to deal with idiots like Pelosi, Newsom, >>>> Occasional-Cortex, and Karen Bass who insist that this problem can be >>>> solved >>>> with carbon caps and solar panels and windmills, when the truth is that if >>>> the >>>> U.S. literally shut down all emissions COMPLETELY-- cars, gone; industry, >>>> gone; cattle farming, gone; airplanes, gone; all of it, gone-- and we >>>> lived >>>> that way for the next 80 years, it would only reduce the global mean >>>> temperature by 0.3 degrees. That's from the U.N. IPCC model itself. You >>>> can ========== REMAINDER OF ARTICLE TRUNCATED ==========