Those whiny, sniveling, lazy, commie, socialist LIBERALS!!!!

Aside from your anecdotal evidence, Your photo doesn't actually undermine the fact that EVs, 'overall', leave a smaller footprint:

OK, you’ve got a picture of a lithium mine and think you’ve cracked the case on EVs being worse for the planet? Cute. Here’s the thing, WKB that strip mine doesn’t exist because some guy woke up and said, 'You know what? Let’s ruin the Earth for fun and giggles today.' No, it exists because fossil fuel junkies like you have been guzzling oil and belching carbon for a century, forcing us to scramble for alternatives to keep the planet from turning into a Mad Max wasteland.

And while you’re clutching your pearls over a lithium mine, let’s not forget the oil rigs, tar sands, pipelines, and refineries that have been vomiting pollution into the air and water like it’s their full-time job. You want to talk carbon footprint? The entire oil industry is Bigfoot stomping all over this planet while you’re busy whining about lithium.

Here’s the kicker: EV batteries can be recycled, and the grid they run on gets cleaner every year. Meanwhile, fossil fuels? Burn them once, and all that carbon goes straight into the atmosphere forever -- no recycling, no redemption. So unless you’ve got a better idea than 'keep driving gas guzzlers and hope the hurricanes don’t kill us all,' maybe sit this one out.

Also, I provided several articles which buttress my point, not yours.

All you've posted is bluster.

 

Well, isn’t that just the trifecta of lazy, uninformed talking points? Let’s take them one at a time, with the sharp edge of reality.

First, "Flooded the U.S. with illegal aliens"—really? Did someone leave the faucet running at the border? Newsflash: Immigration policy has been a bipartisan mess for decades, but if you're blaming liberals for "flooding," you might want to check who built the corporations exploiting these folks for cheap labor. Spoiler alert: It's the same people who hand you the "illegal alien" bogeyman every election cycle while pocketing profits from underpaid field hands. If there's a flood, the dam builders wear red ties too.

Next, "Foisted DEI on us." Oh no! Not the horror of diversity, equity, and inclusion! How dare we try to ensure that everyone gets a seat at the table instead of reserving all the good chairs for the usual suspects? You think DEI is a problem? Try explaining why fairness scares you. Or is it just that when the playing field starts leveling, it feels like you're losing?

And finally, "Groomed school children for perverts." Grooming? Really? Is this the 1950s reefer madness but with rainbow flags? If you're worried about kids being groomed, maybe start with the priests, coaches, and "family-values" types who keep turning up on the wrong side of police stings. Or the systems that fail to teach kids about consent and respect because adults like you are too busy moralizing about library books.

You’re not critiquing policy -- you’re recycling fearmongering buzzwords because outrage is easier than understanding. You want solutions? Start by ditching the cartoonish stereotypes.

 

DEI is the epitome of unfairness,

As the the children, I'll start with the teachers.

 

republicans want to force the USA to be a white Christian nation, just like Muslims in the Middle East if they had their way
and republicans want to force little girls and women to have their rapists babies
and Republicans are shouting from the rooftop to the world how easy it is to come here under our current laws, and guess what, they listen and come, no surprise there

what republican do not get is you can't force people to be white or force them to believe what you want them to believe

 

That is a remarkably ignorant statement.

 

same level as the post I relied on too, glad it was not too complicated for you...

 

The comment you were responding to was in no way the same level as your response.

 

sure it was

 

Liberalism isn't socialism

 

LOL.

I don’t have the inclination to address all your demagoguery. But here’s one example of you being bamboozled.

The Pure Food and Drug Act was written and introduced by Republican Sen. Weldon Heyburn. His bill was very similar to what “Father of the Pure Food and Drugs Act.” Harvey Wiley a Republican abolitionist Civil War veteran proposed to President T. Roosevelt, also a Republican who eventually signed the bill into law.

https://www.politico.com/story/2018...ress-this-day-in-politics-june-23-1906-655483

Both the House and Senate were Republican controlled.

You have trained “copilot” to really be your copilot. It goes where you want to go. It’s not being straight up with you, but simply confirming your bias by cherry picking what YOU want to hear.

I’ve been warning about letting AI do your “thinking” for you.

You done been bamboozled by demagoguery.

 

This is an oil well...



Which footprint is larger?

 

many actually increased their police budgets over the past few years

So how is increasing the budget defunding?

 

Let's get a few things straight.

First off, to be fair to Repubs, I did include a couple of things Repubs supported, even created, such as the EPA. NONE of the items in the OP would have been law without substantial liberal support and liberal noise making, and back in those days, a number of the repubs supporting those causes were also liberal. Hell, the repub signed the CRA were liberal republicans, noting that the bill was brought to fore by Democrats/liberals.

1. I haven't 'trained' Copilot, I ALWAYS ask NON LEADING questions or requests, such as

"Verify or falsify' (whatever the claim of fact was made). It doesn't always give me what I want to hear, it just gives me the facts.

It bases it's answer on information that is publicly available on the internet, which could have been done manually. CoPilot is faster.

2,. Clearly you do not know what the term 'demagoguery' means. What it DOESN"T MEAN is 'anything you disagree with'. You can disagree with any claim of fact, but that doesn't equal my claim, right or wrong, as 'demagoguery'. If you are incapable of such a fundamental distinction, then your credibility is in question.

3. Now then, congratulations on mastering the art of history-leveling -- you’ve made an actual fact sound like some conspiracy cooked up in a dimly lit basement. The Pure Food and Drug Act didn’t just pop out of the ether because Republicans woke up one morning and said, “You know what would really make Big Meat hate us today? Safety regulations!” No, it was progressive reformers -- as in, people who gave a damn about whether their neighbors were eating sausage or sawdust—who made the noise, pushed the legislation, and forced action. The fact that Republicans happened to control Congress in 1906 doesn’t rewrite the story of who did the heavy lifting. Context, my friend, matters.

Enter Upton Sinclair, the muckraker who took America’s industrial filth and slapped it right onto their dinner tables. Sinclair wasn’t some passive observer; he was an unrelenting advocate for reform. When he wrote The Jungle, he didn’t just paint a bleak picture of the meatpacking industry -- he gave it sound, smell, and visceral disgust. You could practically hear the rats scurrying over the meat and taste the rancid sausage he described. He was aiming to expose the hellscape of immigrant worker exploitation, but what really got the public frothing was the thought of biting into their next T-bone and finding out it had been seasoned with rat droppings and industrial chemicals.

Sinclair’s exposé wasn’t just a bestseller -- it was a national wake-up call. President Theodore Roosevelt himself couldn’t ignore it. The public outcry forced Roosevelt to send federal investigators into the meatpacking plants, and when their reports confirmed Sinclair’s horrors, Congress had no choice but to act. Make no mistake: the Republicans in Congress didn’t champion these reforms out of sheer benevolence. They were cajoled, prodded, and dragged into action by Sinclair, progressive activists, and a nation on the verge of vomiting.

Now then, the Copilot statement on this particular issue:

1. Safe bacon and meat products are the result of regulations on the meatpacking industry advocated by liberals.
   • True. The Pure Food and Drug Act of 1906 and subsequent meatpacking regulations were pushed by progressive reformers, including many liberals.

Given the actual history, that statement is correct. I originally asked Copilot to verify or falsify the claims of fact in the OP, and since the OP was 'liberal centric" It gave me a response that reflected the request, You are right that I should have asked it toi include any support given by repubs, that is an oversight on my part. However, the salient fct is that but for Sinclair, a progressive reformer and his book 'the Jungle', and the public outrage it caused, I really doubt the corporate loving repubs would have given a damn about it

Now let’s talk about your attack on AI, or as I like to call it, "griping at the future because the past isn't on your side." You think AI "bamboozled" me? Oh, please. It’s not my “copilot.” It’s not whispering sweet nothings into my ear. It’s more like the snarky librarian who hands me the receipts when I ask. And guess what? Facts don’t care about your nostalgic fantasies of a political utopia where Republicans were the sole purveyors of progress. People like Sinclair, unapologetically liberal and laser-focused on reform, were the ones raising hell to protect the public from corporate greed and governmental indifference. Meanwhile, your ideological ancestors were busy clutching their pearls over the horrors of regulation.

So spare me the lecture about AI bias. You’ve been so busy shouting “bamboozled!” you didn’t notice history handing you a giant mirror. The only demagoguery here is trying to gaslight the legacy of people who fought for safe food. Sinclair didn’t write The Jungle so you could rewrite history. Eat your bacon in peace -- progressives made it safe. You're welcome.

 

Nice try. No gold stars. Sinclair was more of a muck raker than a progressive. It's a far stretch to connect him to today's "progressives".

AI or no AI, this is yet another blatherfest.

 

This is part of the demagoguery of the OP. It’s absolutely not true and is not a rational argument. Thus demagoguery. Don’t talk to me about being “fair”. And remember I loathe the Republican Party.

No. Not facts. What may be factual based on statistics. From copilot.

Faster is not always better. As my example completely destroys the premise copilot created on food safety.

Demagoguery is irrational arguments that appeal to human biases and what people desire most. You are the only one talking about demagoguery being something I don’t like. I never implied that or stated that. It’s your strawman. Your OP story is classic demagoguery.

As a socialist I’m actually a big fan of Sinclair. The Jungle is a fine work. I especially appreciate it as I’m a beef producer as well.

Funny it was all Republicans who did the pre drafting work, drafted the bill, introduced the bill and worked the hardest to pass the bill. Odd that if your OP was accurate it wouldn’t have been left leaning politicians who took action on Sinclair (and other muckraker work). It’s amusing thd OP says this which in light of FACTS I presented is not only demagoguery, it’s a bald faced lie.

It wasn’t “support” by Republicans. They did the pre draft research. They wrote and introduced the bill. And a Republican stood up and made an impassioned speech to revive it as it was languishing amidst other legislation. It was essentially 95% Republican with bipartisan support.

Copilot just got it wrong. Period.

AI is fine for writing copy etc. It’s abhorrently bad at giving full correct answers to questions. A while back I saw AI completely misrepresent the conclusions of a peer reviewed study. Your copilot completely misrepresented the creation of the Pure Food and Drug Act. And your OP made a completely false statement about Republicans fighting every protection. As I said, it’s demagoguery and your copilot got the facts wrong. Period.

AI is a valuable tool. Using it to do your thinking in any capacity is a disaster as it is very unreliable in being factual.

 

That is not the case in the episode under discussion.

 

Company Towns was not capitalisms. Quite the opposite. Its an example of a socialist / communist society where goods and services are controlled by a central power. Liberals want the company town to be the USA . No thank you!

 

No we don't.

 

Ok....so you want capitalism?

 

Regulated to insure fairness and other things, yes.

 

@Patricio Da Silva
" I ALWAYS ask NON LEADING questions or requests"

So starting a thread titled ""Those whiny, sniveling, lazy, commie, socialist LIBERALS!!!!"" is a "NON LEADING questions or requests"... coulda fooled me..

 

Your use of the term 'demagoguery' is a malapropism (meaning you are using the term incorrectly). Demagoguery does not equal merely being false, (though my comment is not false). It means 'using the methods and tactics of a demagogue'

So, who or what is a demagogue? Here is a typical dictionary definition (Collins, in this def)"

Dem·a·gogue
/ˈdeməˌɡäɡ/
noun

• 1.a political leader who seeks support by appealing to the desires and prejudices of ordinary people rather than by using rational argument:"a gifted demagogue with particular skill in manipulating the press"

verb

• 1.rhetorically exploit (an issue) for political purposes in a way calculated to appeal to the desires and prejudices of ordinary people:US"he seems more interested in demagoguing the issue in media interviews than in dialogue"

In no way does my comment remotely designed to pander to anyone,, thus i cannot be determined to use the 'methods of a demagogue' .

Therefore, your use ot the term, thus your understanding of the term, is false.

Since the rest of your comment flows from that falsehood, via the concept of the fruit of a poisoned tree, your conclusions are, therefore, equally false.

Fail.

 

Your comment does not rise above 'you're wrong', and YW comments, without substantiation, are a weak argument.

Upton Sinclair was a muckraker who wrote a book ("The Jungle") that caused a public blacklash forcing repubs in office to draft and pass the Pure Food and Drug act, which was the only point, the point being that the meme point given in the OP is essentially accurate. Should it have mentioned that was signed into law by a repub prez, and repub legislature? Sure, I will acknowledge fault i that omission, but on your point of 'blather', that's a hollow allegation, given the incontrovertible and historical fact that, without the 'muckraker' inciting public blacklash over the manner in which the public's meat was being processed via his very popular book at the time is was published, it is highly unlikely such legislation would have ever made to the floor in a republican controlled congress and senate, given Republicans vast history of siding with Corporations and not 'the people'.

That is history. Study it

https://www.history.com/news/upton-sinclair-the-jungle-us-food-safety-reforms

(Summary of the article) Upton Sinclair's 1906 novel The Jungle aimed to expose the harsh conditions faced by immigrant workers in Chicago's meatpacking industry and promote socialism. However, its graphic depictions of unsanitary meat processing shocked the American public and sparked a movement for food safety reform instead. President Theodore Roosevelt, already supportive of food safety legislation, took notice of the public outcry following the book's release. He dispatched inspectors to investigate the meatpacking facilities, and their findings confirmed Sinclair's allegations. This led to the passage of the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act on June 30, 1906, establishing federal food safety regulations for the first time. Though Sinclair's intention was to highlight labor exploitation, The Jungle inadvertently resulted in significant food safety reforms in the United States.
​

https://teachdemocracy.org/online-l...e-jungle-muckraking-the-meat-packing-industry

(Summary of the article) Upton Sinclair's novel "The Jungle," published in 1906, aimed to expose the horrific working conditions and unsanitary practices in the meat-packing industry in Chicago. The story follows Jurgis Rudkis, a Lithuanian immigrant, who faces exploitation, injury, and poverty while working in the brutal environment of Packingtown. Sinclair's graphic depictions of diseased meat processing shocked the public and led to significant reforms.

The novel sparked outrage, primarily focusing on the appalling quality of meat rather than the plight of workers. In response to public demand for reform, President Theodore Roosevelt invited Sinclair to the White House and established a special commission to investigate the industry. The commission confirmed Sinclair's accounts, leading to the passage of the Meat Inspection Act and the Pure Food and Drug Act in 1906. These laws instituted federal regulations to ensure food safety and cleanliness, marking a significant increase in government oversight of the food industry. Despite Sinclair’s socialist ideals advocating for public ownership of industries, the novel ultimately brought attention to consumer safety and the need for government intervention in corporate practices.
​

 

Specious logic. 'Footprint' does not equal a 'oil rig' nor a 'strip mine'.

None of that can be determined from a cherry picked photo.


Your photo is therefore anecdote, and anecdotal evidence is not evidence,.

I gave you several links so buttress my claim, that EVs, and everything that is included in their manufacture, produce a smaller carbon footprint, on the whole, than that of gas engine cars.

What have you given to counter my argument??

Two cherry pickled and anecdotal photos, which prove nothing.

Please learn how to frame a proper argument, based on:

1. Data
2. Facts
3. Authoritative documents, essays, articles, interviews, lectures, etc., by experts (the more, the merrier).

Does this prove any argument? Well, it certainly presents a stronger argument, and that is the point.

 

Company towns were the ULTIMATE in Capitalism.

A PRIVATE COMPANY owned it without regulation (for the most part) from the Government.