A climate scientist who sounded the alarm in the 1980s is advocating for solar geoengineering (as well as a global carbon tax) which would involve spraying sulphur into the atmosphere to deflect the rays of the sun. Apparently, it's controversial (for more than just the ick factor). Has anyone heard of this?
The last part of that short article notes that his landlord is evicting him after his vote against one of the speaker candidates in the last few weeks.
I would say that Sen Buck has generally been a good example of the type of republican most CO conservatives wanted over the decades, but who knows now, his district is a bit of a conservative wildcard (and very likely to remain R), no idea if they’ll go crazy or moderate.
A climate scientist who sounded the alarm in the 1980s is advocating for solar geoengineering (as well as a global carbon tax) which would involve spraying sulphur into the atmosphere to deflect the rays of the sun. Apparently, it's controversial (for more than just the ick factor). Has anyone heard of this?
Speaking of Buck, he testified in the CO 14th amendment case today. Apparently he had approached McCarthy about being in the Jan 6 committee and was denied.
I'm getting nervous about all the Republican wolves in sheep's clothing nationwide. I'm referring to the people who get elected as Democrats but then switch parties.
While this guy has a long history as a Democrat, I fear that is exactly what he's trying to do in Houston:
A climate scientist who sounded the alarm in the 1980s is advocating for solar geoengineering (as well as a global carbon tax) which would involve spraying sulphur into the atmosphere to deflect the rays of the sun. Apparently, it's controversial (for more than just the ick factor). Has anyone heard of this?
I don't know a lot about this particular geoengineering idea, but in general the argument for (a geoengineering solution) is that we're desperate and don't have time to wait for new technologies to displace fossil fuels, and the argument against if that we really have no idea of the long-term consequences of whatever we unleash on the world on a massive scale (that we almost certainly won't be able to undo). Unfortunately there is some merit to both arguments.
Actually I read an article (it may be covered in the one you posted too, I didn’t read that one) where one of the dems who voted to keep him spoke up. He said he voted the way did because the ethics investigation hasn’t been completed and he hasn’t been convicted and voting to remove him without either of those things sets a dangerous precedent of just removing people Willy nilly. So while I do think santos should be removed, without a completed investigation he does make a valid point.
I'm getting nervous about all the Republican wolves in sheep's clothing nationwide. I'm referring to the people who get elected as Democrats but then switch parties.
While this guy has a long history as a Democrat, I fear that is exactly what he's trying to do in Houston:
Actually I read an article (it may be covered in the one you posted too, I didn’t read that one) where one of the dems who voted to keep him spoke up. He said he voted the way did because the ethics investigation hasn’t been completed and he hasn’t been convicted and voting to remove him without either of those things sets a dangerous precedent of just removing people Willy nilly. So while I do think santos should be removed, without a completed investigation he does make a valid point.
Yeah, I think it was Jamie Raskin, or else he made a similar point. Of the handful of people who have been removed from Congress, 2-3 literally left to join the Confederate Army and the others were already convicted of crimes prior to removal.
Actually I read an article (it may be covered in the one you posted too, I didn’t read that one) where one of the dems who voted to keep him spoke up. He said he voted the way did because the ethics investigation hasn’t been completed and he hasn’t been convicted and voting to remove him without either of those things sets a dangerous precedent of just removing people Willy nilly. So while I do think santos should be removed, without a completed investigation he does make a valid point.
Yeah, I think it was Jamie Raskin, or else he made a similar point. Of the handful of people who have been removed from Congress, 2-3 literally left to join the Confederate Army and the others were already convicted of crimes prior to removal.
Yeah, I think it was Jamie Raskin, or else he made a similar point. Of the handful of people who have been removed from Congress, 2-3 literally left to join the Confederate Army and the others were already convicted of crimes prior to removal.
Jeff Jackson from NC made a similar point.
I saw his video and really appreciated him explaining his vote. It made a lot of sense after he explained it. Basically, he said while he agrees Santos needs to go, we should follow the process. It’s already being done and is a matter of weeks away. If we just expelled him without the whole process, we’re opening it up to it being used against Democrats later. With current Republicans, they could try to expel someone for a parking ticket at the rate they’re going.
I saw his video and really appreciated him explaining his vote. It made a lot of sense after he explained it. Basically, he said while he agrees Santos needs to go, we should follow the process. It’s already being done and is a matter of weeks away. If we just expelled him without the whole process, we’re opening it up to it being used against Democrats later. With current Republicans, they could try to expel someone for a parking ticket at the rate they’re going.
Santos sent thank you letters to those who voted against expulsion. Jamie raskin copy edited it by hand and sent it back. I love the post script that there's no Shane in resigning. Unfortunately I only saw the image of the edited letter in a thumbnail from xitter
I'm getting nervous about all the Republican wolves in sheep's clothing nationwide. I'm referring to the people who get elected as Democrats but then switch parties.
While this guy has a long history as a Democrat, I fear that is exactly what he's trying to do in Houston:
A climate scientist who sounded the alarm in the 1980s is advocating for solar geoengineering (as well as a global carbon tax) which would involve spraying sulphur into the atmosphere to deflect the rays of the sun. Apparently, it's controversial (for more than just the ick factor). Has anyone heard of this?
Things need to be put in place that if someone does change, there needs to be a new election because it's not fair to those who vote in good faith.
This 10000000%. I feel like it's fraud.
How does one implement a recall? Seems warranted if you run on one platform and then wholesale switch...
side note, I couldn't think of the word recall so I googled the first phrase that popped into my head to find it and the first result is DISTURBING. wtf internet. w the actual f.
How does one implement a recall? Seems warranted if you run on one platform and then wholesale switch...
side note, I couldn't think of the word recall so I googled the first phrase that popped into my head to find it and the first result is DISTURBING. wtf internet. w the actual f.
How does one implement a recall? Seems warranted if you run on one platform and then wholesale switch...
side note, I couldn't think of the word recall so I googled the first phrase that popped into my head to find it and the first result is DISTURBING. wtf internet. w the actual f.