The White House and U.S. Capitol both lowered flags to half staff by Tuesday afternoon, after they were out of sync Tuesday in their tributes to the five U.S. service members who were slain by a gunman in Chattanooga last week.
House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, and Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Kentucky announced Tuesday that flags at the Capitol would be lowered to half-staff in honor of the victims.
"Out of respect for their courageous service and sacrifice to our nation, flags at the U.S. Capitol are being lowered to half-staff," Boehner said in a statement.
But at the other end of Pennsylvania Avenue, the flags at the White House noticeably remained at full-staff.
Aides to the president have repeatedly declined to discuss whether the flags at the White House would be similarly lowered. Boehner's office said Tuesday that they had alerted the White House of their plans.
"I don't have more information about the status of the flag over the White House," White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest told reporters Monday. Earnest had nearly the same response for reporters Tuesday.
Republican critics have demanded that the White House immediately follow the Capitol's lead, and Obama eventually ordered flags to be flown at half-staff at the White House in the noon hour.
So apparently Congressional Republicans ordered the flags surrounding the US Capitol be lowered several hours* before Obama ordered the White House flag be lowered.
*John Boehner ("John Boehner") tweeted the announcement at 5:22 a.m. Tuesday morning.
That little twerp only believes polls that correspond to his point of view. (Remember that goofball who came up those brilliant "unskewed" polls back in 2012? Hahaha)
Overall, the amount of CO₂ produced annually is roughly 811 billion tons (gigatons, GT) annually.
771 GT (95%) are produced naturally (ocean-atmosphere exchange, plant & animal respiration, volcanoes, impact events), while those same processes fully absorb all of that, with the capacity to absorb an additional 17 GT. (These aren't established values; more importantly, they are not static: volcanic eruptions, while rare, introduce massive amounts of CO₂ into the atmosphere...but are eventually reabsorbed). So it is safe to say that the amount of carbon dioxide produced by natural sources is completely offset by natural carbon sinks and has been for millions of years.
Of those 811 billion tons, roughly 40 GT (5%) of CO₂ are produced annually by way of human industry:
a) 87% from the burning of fossil fuels
b) 9% land use change (deforestation)
c) 4% industrial processes (chemical reactions not involving burning fossil fuels)
5% may not seem like much. But the fact is that human-caused CO₂ emissions have resulted in a net surplus of carbon dioxide of 20+ GT year after year and those surpluses accumulate over time, and now outstrip the planet's capacity of reabsorption and more vaguely, a friendly biosphere.. Current levels of CO₂ are 400 ppmv, the highest concentration in the past 20 million years...and shows no signs of decreasing..
That's just carbon dioxide...
Methane (CH₄) is a far more potent greenhouse gas (25-30x more than CO₂) , but is far less extant:: currently 1800 ppbv, or 0.02 of CO₂. Significantly, methane emissions increased by a factor of 2.5 (2500%) since the Industrial Age (ca. 1750).
I saw this interview on MSNBC today at the gym*:
Clark: We have got to identify the people who are most likely to be radicalized. We've got to cut this off at the beginning. There are always a certain number of young people who are alienated. They don't get a job, they lost a girlfriend, their family doesn't feel happy here and we can watch the signs of that. And there are members of the community who can reach out to those people and bring them back in and encourage them to look at their blessings here.
But I do think on a national policy level we need to look at what self-radicalization means because we are at war with this group of terrorists. They do have an ideology. In World War II if someone supported #$%$ Germany at the expense of the United States, we didn't say that was freedom of speech, we put him in a camp, they were prisoners of war.
So, if these people are radicalized and they don't support the United States and they are disloyal to the United States, as a matter of principle fine. It's their right and it's our right and obligation to segregate them from the normal community for the duration of the conflict. And I think we're going to have to increasingly get tough on this, not only in the United States but our allied nations like Britain, Germany and France are going to have to look at their domestic law procedures.
Yikes. And he's always seemed so reasonable...
*your favorite uncle Carson done hired himself a PT in April and has so far lost about 20lbs and 4% body fat.
"Trump is gaining support because he's running a "populist" campaign. It's not just Republican voters that are showing interest; but disenchanted Democrats as well. His largest support is coming from the "independent" voters."
Yeah right. This reminds me of those fake "polls" from 2009/2010 stating the Tea Party had significant Dem membership. LOL; Trump's supporters aren't "independent;" he's simply pandering to tea partiers. (I do agree that Trump is running a populist campaign...but so what? Don't you think the masses have any interest?)
"Trump will never win the Republican nomination."
Yes, very unlikely...but I''ll support his candidacy for as long as possible. Go Trump! Vox Populi!
"He lacks, just like Sanders, the infrastructure in each state necessary to win an election. Only the two major parties have that infrastructure in place."
Nonsense; Trump is running as a Republican and Sanders is running as a Democrat. The only similarity between Trump and Sanders is that both are running successful populist campaigns that run contrary to the wishes of their respective party establishment. I strongly support Bernie Sanders over Hillary Clinton on basically every policy point imaginable, but am pretty sure Clinton will win...unfortunately. Sanders calls himself a socialist, but really he's just endorsing FDR's ''New Deal' plus a weak version of Scandinavian quasi-socialism.
Ross Perot (billionaire) ran as an independent in 1992 and won over 19% of the popular vote but didn't get a single electoral vote. Ralph Nader (not a billionaire) tried that same approach in 2000 and got 2.74% of the popular vote.
Unfortunately third party candidates aren't viable in the US; Americans are too polarized and ignorant.
The Middle Class
Obviously there are both crossovers and exceptions within this list.
Conversely, which members of the US electorate are devoted to the GOP?
Free Market Fundamentalists
Ayn Rand disciples
Second Amendment "enthusiasts"
Over 65 yrs old
As per above, there are both crossovers and exceptions.
There are a lot of things about the current GOP makeup that strike me as being philosophically incompatible, but perhaps most notable is the idea that Christians and Ayn Rand followers have anything in common. Objectivism is predicated on absolute atheism and selfishness, i.e; the individual is obligated only to pursue his/her own desires, period. Rand could not have cared less about the public welfare. Jesus on the other hand (according to the gospels) opposed greed and preached in defense of the poor...and wound up becoming the ultimate martyr for his altruism.
Pretty sure that contrast is what Pope Francis had in mind when he mentioned "unfettered capitalism."
Top 10 States by Hispanic Population (2011)
California (55EV): 14.4m, 37.7%
Texas (38EV): 9.8m, 25.7%
Florida (29EV): 4.4m, 19.1%
New York (29EV): 3.5m, 19.5%
Illinois (20EV): 2.1m, 12.9%
Arizona (11EV): 1.9m, 6.5%
New Jersey (16EV): 1.6m, 8.8%
Colorado (9EV): 1.1m, 5.1%
New Mexico (5EV): 1m, 2.1%
Georgia (16EV): 0.9m, 9.8%
Where latino votes will be important in 2016: Nevada (5EV; 26% Hispanic), Arizona, Georgia, Colorado, Florida, New Jersey, Ohio (20EV; 1.9% Hispanic); Pennsylvania (20EV; 3.2% Hispanic). The rest are pretty solid Dem or Repuke.
And let's not forget the black vote, hahaha. I wonder how the Grand Old NeoConfederates will do this time around?
Kasich is a thug, but he's not absolutely crazy nor completely stupid. So he's only batting .333 in terms of what Republicans love. He's basically a pre-tea party Republican, nothing new there.
The RNC is scared to death of Trump. Fox News absolutely loves the man, and his nativist rhetoric is winning him huge points with "the base," so he's not going anywhere anytime soon. The longer he stays in the race, the farther right the Republican clown car will drift; the RNC knows that and are already trying to get other candidates aligned against him. Pass the popcorn.
I concur: Support Trump!
[Bloomberg] Serta Will Stop Selling Donald Trump Mattress Line in Latest Defection
"Serta, the largest U.S. mattress manufacturer, will end its business relationship with Donald Trump after he made disparaging comments about Mexican immigrants."
NBC is running the same story, but with a better title:
"Serta Mattress to Dump Trump"
Headline from Politico:
"Obama: I'm Reagan and Hillary is my Bush 41"
For anyone who doesn't despise Obama for being a black Democrat, the headline is an accurate summary.
"And Iraq is a fiction as a country."
Absolutely correct: the national borders describing most ME countries were drawn around 80-90 years ago...by the British. With few exceptions, each European state now consists of a single people with a shared ethnicity, language, and religion. Why not in the Middle East?
"It's probably going to split up eventually anyway."
"What, you don't think saying that all Mexicans are rapists is going to help the Contards win Hispanic votes?"
Well, Donald the Trump did say that "Some are good." Then tweeted on Tuesday: "I love the Mexican people, but Mexico is not our friend. They're killing us at the border and they're killing us on jobs and trade."
Carlos "I can buy 7 Donalds and still have more than enough buy all his debts" Slim who btw is Mexican was not amused, calling Trump a racist.
There are also significant Kurd populations in Syria (~2m) and especially Iran (~6m); the "Kurdistan region" is huge.
It seems obvious that the smart move would be for the US to simply disengage militarily from the ISIS/ISIL conflict. Its a no-win situation.