Discussion about hot topics trending today

[mad_gater]

It's not just what the law says, it's also what the law enforcement does. USSR had a fairly sensible constitution, after all, and nowhere did it say that those who disagree with the ruling party ought to be subjected to force psychiatric treatment.

or at least as sensible as a constitution that outlines the peoples' rights under 100% tyranny by oligarchy can be anyway

[Annoyed]

United Nations climate talks collapse after Trump shuns Paris pact

Translation: if we can't trick the US into paying the bills, we aren't so interested.

[Gatefan1976]

Your google translate is broken.

[jelgate]

Proof Annoyed didn't read the whole article

[Gatefan1976]

If he read the whole article, he would have realised that it is not US money that was being sought, but it's capacity as a global political leader.
But being the worlds only superpower doesn't matter to trump, unless he gets something out of it.
So who is really after US money?

[Annoyed]

No, it;s just that you folks can't read politician.

The talks exposed deep rifts among industrialized nations, fast-growing economies like China and India and the poorest countries – divides that the U.S. had helped bridge under former President Barack Obama in the run-up to the 2015 Paris climate accord. With Trump moving to pull out of the pact, delegates from many countries retreated behind their long-held grievances over how to bear the burdens of reducing greenhouse gases and preparing for the worsening effects of a changing climate.

Pretty clear that most countries don't want to pay the bill for this. How much did Obama's bridge cost? And as I recall, several large nations wanted to be exempt, China & India I think.

"Bear the Burdens" ? You mean they aren't talking about paying for it?

Trump: Get your greedy little hands out of our pockets.

[Gatefan1976]

You quote it, you put it red, yet in none of it does anyone ask for any money, or a favour.
Yet you cannot see that trump, directly asking for a favour from a foreign country, In a a report he released himself is NOT criminal??

You don't speak politician, because politics requires nuance of facts and understanding contexts.
You speak BS and projected fears.
"well of course they will break the rules, because I WOULD"
You have no notion of integrity, because you have none of your own and cannot understand that integrity means more than getting what you want.
That's what kids do.

[Gatefan1976]

You quote it, you put it red, yet in none of it does anyone ask for any money, or a favour.
Yet you cannot see that trump, directly asking for a favour from a foreign country, In a a report he released himself is NOT criminal??

You don't speak politician, because politics requires nuance of facts and understanding contexts.
You speak BS and projected fears.
"well of course they will break the rules, because I WOULD"
You have no notion of integrity, because you have none of your own and cannot understand that integrity means more than getting what you want.
That's what kids do.

EDIT:
And I have 3, how many do you have?
Just one big orange one.

[jelgate]

He is still a child. At least in mentality and maturity.

Maybe Annoyed is Trump

[Gatefan1976]

He is still a child. At least in mentality and maturity.

Maybe Annoyed is Trump

Makes sense.

[Annoyed]

You quote it, you put it red, yet in none of it does anyone ask for any money, or a favour.
Yet you cannot see that trump, directly asking for a favour from a foreign country, In a a report he released himself is NOT criminal??

You don't speak politician, because politics requires nuance of facts and understanding contexts.
You speak BS and projected fears.
"well of course they will break the rules, because I WOULD"
You have no notion of integrity, because you have none of your own and cannot understand that integrity means more than getting what you want.
That's what kids do.

You ever take any communications courses in college? There is a whole subsubject about speaking in a way to influence the audience. In this case, the goal is twofold: Don't directly lie, and don't withhold information, but provide it in ways that won't be interpreted correctly.

Put more simply, read between the lines.

The clear subtext there is they had the idea that they could get the US to pay for all that crap via carbon taxes, offsets, credits and whatnot, all of which would be passed on to the end users The consumer.. Trump was 100% right to say "no deal" on that scam.

Since that plan won't work now, the rest of the participants are backing out, fearing that they might end up opening their wallets.

[jelgate]

No they aren't. You are making things up again because the article doesn't support your belief that climate change is a scam.

My Communication minor is also crying because of how you butchered persuasive speeches

[Gatefan1976]

You ever take any communications courses in college? There is a whole subsubject about speaking in a way to influence the audience. In this case, the goal is twofold: Don't directly lie, and don't withhold information, but provide it in ways that won't be interpreted correctly.

Yes, but back then it was called 3 unit law.
So I got communications and the law.
Did you ever do communications?

Put more simply, read between the lines.

IF the nations asked for financial support, they would have declared it, and you would have a point. but they never did.
They didn't even imply it.
So they want your cash without asking, or even implying it, but the guy saying "do us a favour" is innocent, and it gives you a full on woody for the senate to act outside the law by pre judging as a jury?

They want US leadership.

The clear subtext there is they had the idea that they could get the US to pay for all that crap via carbon taxes, offsets, credits and whatnot, all of which would be passed on to the end users The consumer.. Trump was 100% right to say "no deal" on that scam.

What a load of bull****.
Back it up or shut the **** up you moron.

Since that plan won't work now, the rest of the participants are backing out, fearing that they might end up opening their wallets.

Yeah, ok man, none of them said it, implied it or even asked for it, but yeah, your "opinion" is right.
Here's a hint.
The people making these decisions won't have to open a ****ing damn thing.
What line of **** are you going to try next?

[Annoyed]

Yes, but back then it was called 3 unit law.
So I got communications and the law.
Did you ever do communications?

Didn't end up doing it, but it was an avenue I was exploring; radio & TV broadcasting, but I was more interested the technical end of things. But I caught a lot of courses about content along the way.

IF the nations asked for financial support, they would have declared it, and you would have a point. but they never did.
They didn't even imply it.
So they want your cash without asking, or even implying it, but the guy saying "do us a favour" is innocent, and it gives you a full on woody for the senate to act outside the law by pre judging as a jury?

They want US leadership.

You're ignoring a key aspect. Politicians don't tell the truth, particularly when it's something some one might not want to hear.

And what the heck does this have to do with the partisan attempt to impeach Trump?

[jelgate]

So now you are using generalizations to back your claim because the facts of the article don't support it

He is calling out your hypocrisy