• mozz@mbin.grits.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    2 months ago

    Oh, fracking is a huge deal. As is the rest of energy policy, as is the half a billion tons per year CO2e that Biden’s policies have removed from our emissions.

    I was referring to the idea of removing any level of qualified analysis from the evaluation of Harris’s real policies proposed or otherwise, and replacing it with “she made THIS one-off comment several years ago about something that is purely a performative aspect of any policy because the current congressional climate simply will not allow a ban on fracking anyway, and then that contradicts this OTHER one-off comment she made just recently about something SHE’S A FUCKIN FLIP FLOPPER” horse race disingenuous bullshit

    Hope this helps

    • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 months ago

      You can’t simply analyze your way out of the extremely unhealthy/unsustainable/environmentally damaging practice that is fracking by pointing to CO2 reduction policies. People aren’t objecting to fracking because of its CO2 emissions (not just, anyway), it’s a problem because it poisons aquifers and causes untold amounts of harm to subterranean and geological systems. Saying ‘but look at all the other good stuff they’re doing for CO2 reduction!’ is only compelling if CO2 was the primary concern of the practice (it isn’t).

      And anyway, you could have that conversation without constantly complaining about certain factual statements not aligning to your prejudiced electoral motivations and without coming into every conversation accusing people you disagree with of misrepresenting reality

      the current congressional climate simply will not allow a ban on fracking anyway

      lmao oh well fuck me then, guess we can’t expect any progress from our politicians

      Why do I always find you in the comments trying to nuance your way out of criticizing democratic positions.

      • mozz@mbin.grits.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        2 months ago

        So then I said, Herr Thälmann, how important is nuance, in analyzing a political situation? How important is compromise with people even who don’t see eye to eye with you perfectly, politically?

        And he said, ZERO. Just push for what you want. If it’s not perfect, it’s garbage; try to oppose it. Compromise is the obstacle to progress.

        And I said wait. How can I hear you? I thought you died. In Buchenwald.

        And from that point on, I heard nothing. Only silence.

        • archomrade [he/him]@midwest.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 months ago

          “If you have nothing good to say about my party then you must be seeking to overthrow it.”

          ‘What could go wrong with compromising with fascists’ he wonders