XPost: rec.arts.tv
From: nanoflower@notforg.m.a.i.l.com
On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 16:11:35 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701
wrote:
>On Sep 18, 2024 at 8:41:07 AM PDT, "shawn"
>wrote:
>
>> On Wed, 18 Sep 2024 13:55:15 -0000 (UTC), BTR1701
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On Sep 17, 2024 at 11:07:36 PM PDT, "super70s"
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2024-09-18 04:46:16 +0000, BTR1701 said:
>>>>
>>>>> In article ,
>>>>> Your Name wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 9/14/24 1:38 PM, BTR1701 wrote:
>>>>>>> In article ,
>>>>>>> Ubiquitous wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Megyn Kelly blasted Taylor Swift after the pop star came out and
endorsed
>>>>>>>> Vice President Kamala Harris for president following the ABC
Presidential
>>>>>>>> Debate.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Before anyone lets Swift influence their vote, they ought to stop and
>>>>>>> consider that 90% of her songs are about how she always chooses the
>>>>>>> wrong person.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> But those songs are about her appalling taste in boyfriends (except
the
>>>>>> pot-shot at Katy Perry) and I doubt she wants Harris as her
"boyfriend"
>>>>>> ... although, it would be a much better choice than any of her
previous
>>>>>> or curerent braindead morons.
>>>>>
>>>>> Taylor Swift is a billionaire.
>>>>
>>>> So is Trump. At least that's what he claims. Who knows what he may owe
>>>> Russian oligarchs that doesn't show up on his financial statements.
>>>>
>>>>> She's not at the grocery store having to
>>>>> decide whether to feed her family or pay her mortgage.
>>>>
>>>> Neither is Trump.
>>>>
>>>>> She's not at the gas pump deciding if she can fill her tank up or just
>>>>> settle for half because gas prices are so high.
>>>>
>>>> Neither is Trump.
>>>
>>> Trump isn't the one saying the economy is super-duper thanks to Democrats.
>>>
>>>>> While she's flying her private jets around the world, you're struggling
>>>>> to gas up your car just so you can get to work.
>>>>
>>>> Really? Gas is around $2.70/gal. around here.
>>>
>>> $5.12 in deep blue California, down from a high of over $7.00/gallon in the
>>> last year, in a state run by Democrats from top to bottom.
>>
>> That's going to remain the same even if Trump wins the Presidency as
>> you well know. Since the reason for your high gas prices is due to
>> California politics. Price in gas has been coming down. I just noticed
>> even the premium has dropped below $3/gallon here in the Atlanta area.
>>
>>>>> (That's when you're not worrying how long it'll be before the
>>>>> 'progressives'
>>>>> in your state legislature sacrifice your car altogether to appease
their
>>>>> Climate Cult.)
>>>>
>>>> Pure scare tactics, we know how desperate the right is these days.
>>>
>>> Might want to look into Gavvy Newsom's ban on gas-powered vehicles by 2030,
>>> genius. And as the California car market goes, traditionally so goes the
rest
>>> of the nation.
>>
>> It won't happen as too many states in the USA will never go for that.
>
>They will if the federal government follows California's lead. Kammie is a
>graduate of the same San Francisco school of politics that produced Jerry
>Brown, Gavin Newsom, Chesa Boudin, and Nancy Pelosi. What makes you think she
>won't take their baton and run with it?
Even if she wanted to she can't due to the need to get Congress and
the other states to go along.
Too many places that would never accept getting rid of gas/diesel
powered vehicles. Heck, I like the idea of EVs but I wouldn't want one
until they have much more development. I'm not so worried about the
way they behave in cold but I don't care for the long recharge times
with the need to recharge every few hundred miles. (Yes, even though
they may have 300 mile range they say to lengthen the time the
batteries last you shouldn't recharge it to more than 80% of the
capacity.)
>> Especially given how electric vehicles behave when it turns really
>> cold. Not something you want when even your nearest neighbor may be
>> miles away.
>
>Not a concern for Gavvy. We have plenty of places that get snow and freezing
>temps in California but the Climate Cult doesn't care. The ultimate goal is to
>end private car ownership altogether, of course.
>
>The powers that be know this whole EV thing is unworkable, both from an
>environmental and practical perspective. They're just using them as a way of
>accomplishing the first part of the plan: getting rid of all the gas-powered
>vehicles.
>
>After that's accomplished, they'll suddenly 'discover' that the EV is just as
>bad for mother Gaia as those old dirty gas cars were, just in different ways,
>so those will also need to be restricted, with the ultimate goal of ending
>personal vehicle ownership altogether. Because nothing has given people more
>freedom in the last 100 years than being able to own their own car and drive
>wherever and whenever they want.
>
>For the greater good, you'll slowly be restricted and banned until your only
>options will be walking, biking, and public transportation. If you want to
>travel anywhere those things don't go, you'll have to apply to the government
>for permission to use an EV, with such permits being rarely granted and
>extremely expensive when they are. And don't even think about flying anywhere.
>Certainly not for anything as frivolous as a vacation.
>
>This is the plan. It's indisputable that these are the goals. Every major
>city, the U.S. government, and the United Nations have published versions of
>them. It used to be called Agenda 21 until that became a pejorative after
>enough people read it and realized what it meant, so they changed the name and
>repackaged it in shinier, happier verbiage. But at its heart, they want to
>restrict the lives and the movements of the "average citizen" (note the
>language that distinguishes between you and me and those who aren't
>"average"-- i.e., elite celebrities and government officials; these
>restrictions will not be for them, just for you).
>
>They want to end the suburban lifestyle and individual home ownership for the
>vast majority of society. Gavin Newsom has said as much. He has outright
>stated that the "individual suburban homeowner model is unsustainable in
>California and society must be reimagined and reformed accordingly".
What about the need to produce food? EVs aren't exactly a good option
for many farms and without farms there won't be food to keep those
voters alive.
>
>So it's no surprise that California is well on its way with this plan, passing
[continued in next message]
--- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05
* Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)
|
