Trump II

[Alan Klein]

The more I think about it, the more I believe it was a setup.  They have the Russian Air Force dropping regular bombs wherever they want.  They practically beat the terrorists.  So they decide to use a chemical bomb against civilians?  No, that was a setup.

[bcooter]

Jeff,

On my post your 100% correct, I overreacted and made it personal and was wrong.

I apologize for doing what I blamed others for.

No excuses, but I hear so much hatred everyday and not about DT but everything, it makes me ill.

We have to pull together use common sense and find solutions.

There is only about 20% of what DT has proposed that I agree with, though he kills it with his messaging. 

He needs to be more moderate in tone and then tougher behind closed doors.

But these are minor issues and we need major changes, though me writing on a photo forum isn’t going to help.

Once again . . . my bad.

BC

[LesPalenik]

Get Them While They Sleep

President Trump rolled back regulations that ban "predator control" hunting on Alaska's refuges, including protections for hibernating bears in Alaska.
The ban protected hibernating bears from being hunted, along with wolf cubs in dens. It also protected these animals from being targeted from helicopters.

http://thehill.com/regulation/327113-trump-repeals-alaskan-bear-hunting-regs

[Alan Klein]

Get Them While They Sleep

President Trump rolled back regulations that ban "predator control" hunting on Alaska's refuges, including protections for hibernating bears in Alaska.
The ban protected hibernating bears from being hunted, along with wolf cubs in dens. It also protected these animals from being targeted from helicopters.

http://thehill.com/regulation/327113-trump-repeals-alaskan-bear-hunting-regs

You're only telling half the story.  He's handing back control and regulation to the sovereign state of Alaska to regulate their wildlife.  The state and the people of Alaska should make their own decisions about these local things.  I'm sure the people of Alaska care about their wildlife just as in other states and will make good decisions.   Washington DC is 6000 miles away. The Federal government has stuck its nose into too many things that are state issues.  It's time we give power back to the states.

[Schewe]

I apologize for doing what I blamed others for.

Apology accepted...and I appreciate it.

Truth be told, I was taken aback because it didn't really sound like you...but I tend to agree that stuff gets pretty tense-particularly when it gets personal–which this thread has stayed away from. Something that didn't happen with the 1st Trump thread.

Regarding the comments about the housing crisis, Iraq, & healthcare, I really agree with them.

As it relates to climate change, yes, there's a lot of anti-USA sentiment but richly deserved from my point of view. The US has been a major polluter and exploiter of natural resources so when we went out and gathered the world to do something about it for the Paris Agreement, then upon electing Trump we get a president who is a denier and the head of the EPA who wants to gut the agency, I think the rest of the world has a right to be kinda pissed off.

But there is room for reasonable discussion amongst adults. So I thank you for cleaning that up and the rest of the participants for resisting the temptation to get mean and nasty.

[bcooter]

Apology accepted...and I appreciate it.

Truth be told, I was taken aback because it didn't really sound like you...but I tend to agree that stuff gets pretty tense-particularly when it gets personal–which this thread has stayed away from. Something that didn't happen with the 1st Trump thread.

Sorry, but I live in a place that if I Don't cry and honestly scream about the election, I get chased into my house with words.  People on the west side of LA are just goofy.  Honestly.

I don't like everything DT has stood for, like less the way he has gone about it, but let's all be clear, washington, both parties suck.  Remember these guys take an oath to do well for the country though mainly line their pockets.

Personally, I think Joe Biden is kind of silly though fun,  but I would have voted for him in a heartbeat  because after all those years he only has 500k in the bank.  2 year house members clear 2 million.

I hope someone drains the swamp, but I don't think it will ever happen.

But once again sorry for being personal.  I can disagree with you and still learn something.

Maybe we can pull together and kick some ass, cause they all deserve it.

BC

[Schewe]

File this under delicious irony...

U.S. Coal Companies to President Trump: Stick with the Paris Climate Deal

Some big American coal companies have advised President Donald Trump's administration to break his promise to pull the United States out of the Paris Climate Agreement—arguing that the accord could provide their best forum for protecting their global interests.

Remaining in the global deal to combat climate change will give U.S. negotiators a chance to advocate for coal in the future of the global energy mix, coal companies like Cloud Peak Energy (CLD, +1.30%) and Peabody Energy (BTUUQ, -43.68%) told White House officials over the past few weeks, according to executives and a U.S. official familiar with the discussions.

"The future is foreign markets, so the last thing you want to do if you are a coal company is to give up a U.S. seat in the international climate discussions and let the Europeans control the agenda," said the official, who asked not to be named because he was not authorized to speak publicly on the issue.

"They can’t afford for the most powerful advocate for fossil fuels to be away from the table," the official said.

Well, ok...if that help keeps the Paris Agreement in play, I can live with that...and on top of the coal industries, there's also this:

Exxon to Trump: Don't ditch Paris climate change deal

ExxonMobil doesn't want President Trump to abandon the global climate agreement reached in Paris.

America's biggest oil company told the White House it believes the Paris agreement is an "effective framework for addressing the risks of climate change" and the U.S. should remain a party to it.

Exxon (XOM) said the country is "well positioned to compete" under the terms of the Paris deal, which was reached in late 2015 with the goal of slowing global warming. President Obama hailed the agreement as "the moment that we finally decided to save our planet."

The Exxon letter was sent to the White House on March 22, just days before Trump took a massive swipe at environmental regulations implemented under Obama. The administration had asked Exxon for its views on the Paris accord.

Trump signed an executive order on Tuesday to undo the Clean Power Plan, which aimed to slash carbon emissions by coal plans and other power utilities.

Before taking office, Trump called climate change a "hoax" and blasted the Paris COP21 agreement as a "bad deal" for the U.S.
However, after winning the election Trump told The New York Times he has an "open mind" about the Paris agreement and said he believes clean air and "crystal clear water" are important.

It's important to realize just how critical the Paris Agreement could be for the future and it would be seriously foolish to not have a chair at the table.

[Schewe]

...and then there's this...

Trump Model Management Employees Found New Agency Called "Anti"

Supposedly the name of the new agency isn't necessarily a dig at the president.

In case you weren't aware, President Donald Trump owns a modeling agency called Trump Model Management. Founded in 1999, the company came under fire during Trump's presidential campaign and back in February, talk of an industry boycott began to circulate on social media. "I'm committing from this day forward, I refuse to be a part of any job or project that includes casting from Trump Models," celebrity hairstylist Tim Aylward wrote on Facebook. "Fellow [hair and makeup], photo, and production friends, has there been any conversation about an organized boycott within the industry?"

Since then, models and employees alike have been leaving in droves, a handful of them forming a new modeling agency called Anti Management. The new company currently represents 20 models (many formerly of Trump's agency) and claims to be putting special focus on improving models' sometimes sometimes frightening working conditions.

It seems that the Trump Brand is losing it's luster. Mother Jones (a hard left leaner) had this story: Donald Trump's Modeling Agency Is on the Verge of Collapse, Say Industry Insiders

The president's politics are hurting one of his favorite businesses.

Donald Trump's presidency hasn't been good for one of his favorite businesses. The president's modeling agency has been losing models and senior staff in recent months amid a growing backlash over his toxic politics. And the problems at Trump Model Management appear to be escalating. In interviews with Mother Jones, three industry insiders said they believe the agency could be forced to close.

The sources—two model bookers who have worked with Trump Models and another person with deep ties to the agency—attributed the firm's sudden tailspin to the controversial president himself. The once glamorous Trump brand, they said, now appears to be tainted.

"Yeah, it's closing," said Virginie Deren, a model booker at the top Paris firm Premium, which co-represents a handful of models with Trump Model Management. Deren said she was given this information by a Trump booker. "It's surprising that it's come to that point," she added. "It's rough."

Trump executives didn't respond to multiple requests for comment for this story, but employees of the agency said this week that business is continuing as normal.

Haven't dealt with model agencies for over a decade but I looked at Trump Models and didn't think too much of it. But I did notice one pretty icky thing on the Contact page. At the bottom they say: Please be aware that there are certain individuals falsely representing themselves as “scouts” of Trump Models on the internet. If you are contacted by any person claiming to be a representative of Trump Models, do not respond before verifying their identity by calling the agency at XXX-XXX-XXXX.

[Schewe]

Following up with more environmental news...

New EPA documents reveal even deeper proposed cuts to staff and programs

The Environmental Protection Agency has issued a new, more detailed plan for laying off 25 percent of its employees and scrapping 56 programs including pesticide safety, water runoff control, and environmental cooperation with Mexico and Canada under the North American Free Trade Agreement.

At a time when the agency is considering a controversial rollback in fuel efficiency standards adopted under President Obama, the plan would cut by more than half the number of people in EPA’s division for testing the accuracy of fuel efficiency claims by automakers.

It would transfer funding for the program to fees paid by the automakers themselves.

The spending plan, obtained by The Washington Post, offers the most detailed vision to date of how the 31 percent budget cut to the EPA ordered up by President Trump’s Office of Management and Budget would diminish the agency.

The March 21 plan calls for even deeper reductions in staffing than earlier drafts. It maintains funding given to states to administer waste treatment and drinking water. But as a result, the budget for the rest of EPA is slashed 43 percent.

As a resident of Chicago, the slashed funding for the Great Lakes Restoration project is worrisome. Here's a graph of some of the major cuts.



Eeeeek!

[Schewe]

To drive it home, maybe the Big Cheeto would take this more seriously if somebody tells him his precious Mar-a-Lago resort is at direct risk.

As Seas Around Mar-a-Lago Rise, Trump’s Cuts Could Damage Local Climate Work

The president’s budget calls for ending an environmental program that had supported climate efforts in his and several Cabinet members’ backyards.

Climate change isn’t a nebulous threat for Palm Beach County, Florida, where sea creatures swim through driveways during seasonal king tides that flood low-lying streets. For years, the county has worked to address the problem by mapping flood risk, upgrading coastal storm protections and creating a regional climate action plan with three other counties. Later this year, local officials hope to host a sea level workshop by Thomas Ruppert, an attorney with the National Sea Grant College Program.

But if the most prominent resident of Palm Beach County has his way, Sea Grant would cease to exist. President Trump’s proposed 2018 budget seeks to eliminate the $73 million program, along with more than $177 million worth of other initiatives within the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, many aimed at protecting communities from climate impacts.

Trump’s Mar-a-Lago resort, where he has spent about half of his weekends since taking office, is among the most vulnerable properties in the county. Most of the resort could be underwater by 2100, and the lowest areas already flood during certain tides.

This map shows you what would happen with the sea level changes in the state of Florida...
Coastal Florida and Everglades - Sea Level Rise Map
Select the sea level rise amount at the left.

I guess this gives new meaning to my f#%k you Donald Trump photo :~)


Mar-a-Lago is f#%ked!

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

Indeed...

[pegelli]

Indeed...

It's a funny one Slobodan, just copied it on my hard drive for later use (I assume you're not the author?)

Btw, this thread would not have been so long, much fun, educational, interesting  and exiting if everybody who didn't agree with Jeff's original post would not have reacted 

[Slobodan Blagojevic]

It's a funny one Slobodan, just copied it on my hard drive for later use (I assume you're not the author?)

Of course not. I wouldn't be caught dead with a Lipton tea bags. My tea of choice is Darjeeling, First Flush, loose leaves

[Alan Klein]

Following up with more environmental news...

New EPA documents reveal even deeper proposed cuts to staff and programs

As a resident of Chicago, the slashed funding for the Great Lakes Restoration project is worrisome. Here's a graph of some of the major cuts.



Eeeeek!

Most of the programs are just being return to the states to handle.  Funding is also transferred to the states.  Local communities mostly have better knowledge of the local conditions.  Let the people who live there make decisions that effect them the most rather than some bureaucrats in Washington who could care less. 

[Schewe]

Most of the programs are just being return to the states to handle.  Funding is also transferred to the states.

Oh...really? What's your source for that statement?

[Alan Klein]

Oh...really? What's your source for that statement?

You're right.  I misunderstood the chart.  I thought they returned the funding too.  So now the states will have to determine if it's important enough to spend the money.  Your program will cost $289 million for the Great Lakes Restoration project.  I realize Illinois has budget problems especially with government pensions, but so does the federal government.  We all want stuff we can't afford any longer.  In any case, it's not law yet.  Congress will provide funding in many areas Trump wants to cut. 

[Alan Goldhammer]

Most of the programs are just being return to the states to handle.  Funding is also transferred to the states.  Local communities mostly have better knowledge of the local conditions.  Let the people who live there make decisions that effect them the most rather than some bureaucrats in Washington who could care less.

The problem is that a lot of the programs being proposed cover multiple states who might not cooperate.  Pennsylvanian framers were very lax with fertilizer runoff into the Susquehanna River which empties into the Chesapeake Bay.  Great Lakes are shared by multiple states as well.

[Schewe]

So now the states will have to determine if it's important enough to spend the money.  Your program will cost $289 million for the Great Lakes Restoration project.

The problem is in the case of the Great Lakes there are 8 US states and 2 Canadian provences with a stake in the program. If the Feds don't do it it won't be done. As the largest inland lake complex the lakes are an inportant environmental issue.

So, screw the Wall and fund the EPA. Recent polls indicate the majority of Americans don't want a new wall...

[JNB_Rare]

To drive it home, maybe the Big Cheeto would take this more seriously if somebody tells him his precious Mar-a-Lago resort is at direct risk.
As Seas Around Mar-a-Lago Rise, Trump’s Cuts Could Damage Local Climate Work

Florida has more to worry about besides sea levels. There's the stinking, toxic algae blooms that need environmental attention.

Slimy Green Beaches May Be Florida's New Normal

Solving the problem is stymied by legislative bickering and warring factions that drive modern Florida’s economy and politics. Few expect environmental restorationists, Big Agriculture, and the residential housing industry to get together and agree to a fix.

Florida Tourism Not Seeing Green As Toxic Algae Chokes Business

Donald Trump learned about algae blooms from Brian Mast

U.S. Rep. Brian Mast said he talked to Trump during a visit to Mar-a-Lago about three weeks ago about the algae blooms that plagued the St. Lucie River last summer. Mast said he tried to bring the issue home for Trump by mentioning the blooms expanded into the Lake Worth lagoon near Trump's estate in Palm Beach.

Environmental inaction has economic consequences, too. It will be interesting to see if this particular issue does get federal funds under the Trump administration. Obama refused a request for federal funding, saying that the state had enough resources to handle the issue itself.

[DeanChriss]

The problem is in the case of the Great Lakes there are 8 US states and 2 Canadian provences with a stake in the program. If the Feds don't do it it won't be done. As the largest inland lake complex the lakes are an inportant environmental issue.

So, screw the Wall and fund the EPA. Recent polls indicate the majority of Americans don't want a new wall...

The five Great Lakes make up the largest body of fresh water on Earth, accounting for one-fifth of all the fresh surface water on the planet.

There are already walls on some large sections of the US/Mexico border and they are commonly tunneled under, climbed over, and gone through. They don't work. Even China's Great Wall failed. A wall is just a political statement and means little or nothing otherwise. But it is extremely expensive to make up for that. So yes, "screw the wall and fund the EPA". Great Lakes pollution by industry was a major reason EPA was created in the first place... by a republican!

edit: I should mention that countless cars, trains, and trucks cross the border every day and there are lots of illegals that get through concealed inside them. The wall does nothing for that. It's just a crazy idea proposed by a crazy guy. That says nothing about the many miles of coastal border where illegal crossings take place. If you want to tackle illegal border crossing the solution has to be comprehensive immigration reform, which nobody wants to touch.