Just because they do 1 thing i agree on doesn't mean they are immune to criticism. What have either of them done for the state of NJ? Booker rarely even shows up to vote on anything, he has one of the worst attendance records in the country.
OT: Coming to a beach near you in NJ and NY
- Thread starter newell138
- Start date
- Status
Just because they do 1 thing i agree on doesn't mean they are immune to criticism. What have either of them done for the state of NJ? Booker rarely even shows up to vote on anything, he has one of the worst attendance records in the country.
Earlier this week, our ring camera caught a decent size fox walking to our front door at 2:45 a.m. I heard him growl-"let me in, the offshore windmills are killing me."
🙄 🙄
'Tell us why': Monmouth Commissioners call for investigation into surge of whale deaths
Monmouth County officials call for an immediate stop to offshore wind energy work along New Jersey's coast amid a surge in whale deaths.
www.app.com
That's how the game is played these days. Both sides do it.
Whichever party is opposite an incumbent, they will expend great effort to shape a never-ending narrative of blame, including by adopting every possible position that can force the incumbent to make tough, unpopular choices that are easy to attack regardless of which choice is made.
Propagandist media then screams the narrative 24/7 until people who willingly (for reasons I cannot fathom) subject themselves to it. So you wind up with folks on both sides constantly parroting whichever talking head spun up the silly narrative to them. It's extremely common to both sides.
What is laughable about all this is that both sides constantly accuse the other side of being sheep or being brainwashed or mindlessly regurgitating talking points. Yet both sides are doing precisely the same thing, and doing it all the time.
It's a fascinating reveal of some pretty weird human tendencies towards mass hypnosis or mass self-delusion or mass lack of self-awareness... or all the above. I'm amazed at the failure of people to realize how much they're being manipulated by the very people they side with (and again, both sides do it).
I'm mostly convinced that the only way people can extricate themselves from their delusions is to refuse to read, watch or listen to ANY news source for at least a year. Just totally unplug and focus on something else. People say "then I'll be uninformed". But that's wrong. They're not being informed now, they're being misinformed and manipulated.
Do you feel your 2 senators are doing anything productive? They work for the citizens of NJ and get paid very well to do so. Not even showing up to vote is certainly not doing your job. If anyone in the private sector had his record of attendance they would be fired. I don't give a shit what side they are on, if you dont do your job, I will criticize you. 90% of politicians on the federal level don't give a crap about anyone but themselves, this included making themselves richer or finding a way to stay in office.
Looks like we need to elect County Commissioners who have a basic grasp of the definition of "standing".🙄 🙄
'Tell us why': Monmouth Commissioners call for investigation into surge of whale deaths
Monmouth County officials call for an immediate stop to offshore wind energy work along New Jersey's coast amid a surge in whale deaths.www.app.com
Looking for a nude beach? NJ beach is one of the best skinny dipping spots in the world
A top skinny-dipping list features New Jersey spot among best in the world.
www.app.com
I think it's very likely that, if I felt like it which I do not, I could create a huge list of issues with all 50 senators. And all the representatives.
And I think it highly likely that Booker sucks more or less as much as most of the rest of the senators, albeit I'm sure they vary in the specifics of their suckiness. I'm not about to defend him or any politicians. Nor am I interested in being drawn into a pointless biased comparison of senators. If it were up to me, I limit all congress-people to a single 6 year term. That would be a good start at reducing the suckiness.
With regard to voting records, before I would condemn any senator from any party (or no party), including any of the 6 senators with more missed votes than Booker (3 Reps, 2 Dems, 1 Indy as of the 116th congress, see the link below), I would want to research the specific votes and interview the senators to gain a better understanding of what they missed and why they missed it. I can think of several legitimate reasons why it might be a waste of time for a senator to show up to vote for a particular bit of legislation.
Then I'd actually be somewhat informed as opposed to being spoon-fed a partisan narrative which is meaningless absent the above details. Maybe it's awful that Booker and the others skipped so many votes. But I don't know nearly enough to reach that conclusion and, since I lack any party preference, there's no value in me leaping to a conclusion.
I'd be 100% up for kicking Booker and the other 49 senators out at the end of their current terms. Same with the House. One term and GTFO for all of them.
Here's the info on congressional voting records up through the 116th congress:
Lifetime voting records of United States Senators and Representatives in the 116th Congress
Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politics
Why are these orcas killing sharks and removing their livers? — National Geographic
When sevengill shark carcasses with pectoral tears and missing livers began washing up on the South African coast, questions abounded. Then a marine biologist found something: orca tooth impressions.
I think it's very likely that, if I felt like it which I do not, I could create a huge list of issues with all 50 senators. And all the representatives.
And I think it highly likely that Booker sucks more or less as much as most of the rest of the senators, albeit I'm sure they vary in the specifics of their suckiness. I'm not about to defend him or any politicians. Nor am I interested in being drawn into a pointless biased comparison of senators. If it were up to me, I limit all congress-people to a single 6 year term. That would be a good start at reducing the suckiness.
With regard to voting records, before I would condemn any senator from any party (or no party), including any of the 6 senators with more missed votes than Booker (3 Reps, 2 Dems, 1 Indy as of the 116th congress, see the link below), I would want to research the specific votes and interview the senators to gain a better understanding of what they missed and why they missed it. I can think of several legitimate reasons why it might be a waste of time for a senator to show up to vote for a particular bit of legislation.
Then I'd actually be somewhat informed as opposed to being spoon-fed a partisan narrative which is meaningless absent the above details. Maybe it's awful that Booker and the others skipped so many votes. But I don't know nearly enough to reach that conclusion and, since I lack any party preference, there's no value in me leaping to a conclusion.
I'd be 100% up for kicking Booker and the other 49 senators out at the end of their current terms. Same with the House. One term and GTFO for all of them.
Here's the info on congressional voting records up through the 116th congress:
Lifetime voting records of United States Senators and Representatives in the 116th Congress
Ballotpedia: The Encyclopedia of American Politicsballotpedia.org
I think term limits for senators would be welcome - allowing people like Mitch, Nancy and others to be around for so long, grants them excessive power and control. Mitch, for example, a senator from a tiny state of 4 million people, has forced his will upon the entirety of the country for far too long. While we are at it, there should be term limits for congressmen, supreme court justices and all the rest. Why only for the President?
I completely agree insofar as all elected officials are concerned.
I'm not sure I agree about SCOTUS justices, though. I'd have to think about it more.
What I prefer to see is ideological balance between the two parties. Both in congress and in the courts. I dislike it when either party holds too much power. Balance forces compromise and produces moderate longer-lived solutions to issues that are more fairly representative of the needs and desires of the majority of the general population.
So what I'd want to see with SCOTUS is giving it 10 confirmed justices at all times, 5 appointed by R presidents, 5 by D presidents. However, there can only ever be 9 active justices at any given time.
Whenever a D is president, the most recent D appointee steps aside temporarily, so it'd be 5 Rs, 4 Ds. When an R is president, it'd be the other way around, giving us 5 Ds, 4 Rs.
This would help ensure the judiciary can perform as a check on the executive branch.
I think between single congressional term limits and SCOTUS rebalancing, the nation would have a vastly better chance at reversing the current trend towards extremism we're seeing across the country on both sides.
I would give judges anywhere from 15 to 20 years. So, a generation but not a lifetime.
If we adopted my forced balance concept, then I'd be okay with a mandatory retirement age perhaps or a term limit. Because balance is assured so it doesn't matter whom the president is at any given time, and there would be no particular motivation for a justice to overstay their useful time in order to wait for the next presidential election.
Which highlights an issue w/my plan. We would need a queue or waiting list of confirmed justices who are basically on deck for the next available slot. Perhaps 5 from each party. Or 10.
That way, if we need either a D-nominee or an R-nominee at a time when the president is of the opposite party from the justice we need, we just pull one in from whomever is on the top of the waiting list of confirmees.
Might want to give presidents some authority to update the waiting lists, replacing some of the justices on the list, perhaps limited to only a couple per president.
Special Report! Save the Whales, Stop Wind Mills:
www.nj.com
Dead whales are latest flashpoint in the 20-year battle over offshore wind farms in N.J.
Can offshore wind turbines and whales coexist? Scientists weigh in.
Special Report! Save the Whales, Stop Wind Mills:
Dead whales are latest flashpoint in the 20-year battle over offshore wind farms in N.J.
Can offshore wind turbines and whales coexist? Scientists weigh in.
I’m a very pro wildlife and nature person.
Stop these treacherous windmills and their slaughter
No, I didn’t know you were so passionate about animal and marine life.
I’m glad you’re against all sonar mapping and deep water construction and drilling. Very cool!
I'm curious how a person like you makes the conscious decision to always take the wrong side of things, just to be a dick.
I actually see myself in one of the pictures of the article lolSpecial Report! Save the Whales, Stop Wind Mills:
Dead whales are latest flashpoint in the 20-year battle over offshore wind farms in N.J.
Can offshore wind turbines and whales coexist? Scientists weigh in.
This point in the article is and has always been my concern…
Despite the need for clean energy to address the mounting issue of climate change, there is the one issue yet to be fully explored that confronts every decision on how to produce that energy. It’s not whales. It’s not the sight of wind turbines on the horizon. It’s not the engineering.
It is always how much is it going to cost?
no one has told anyone what the impact to electricity bills will be. Someone has to shell out the billions of dollars this will cost
How a 100-turbine wind farm is about to change Newport County's oceanfront views
If the permitting process goes according to plan, Revolution Wind’s 100 turbines will be up and running by 2025, with hundreds more to follow.
www.newportri.com
The Block Island wind farm, originally Deepwater Wind, was the first of its kind in the United States when it started operating in 2016, and it was actually born from a proposal made by then-Rhode Island Gov. Donald Carcieri in 2006.
Based on this thread, I thought NJ was the first to start installing offshore windmills. I guess there are plenty of dead whales in Rhodes Island but they didn’t care.
Last edited:
I heard you the first time. You’re a PETA guy who want the best for animals and fish. Totally get your anti deep water construction and drilling. Understandable.
I can respect concerns over cost overruns and the financial aspects of big projects like this, as they're fair game, IMO. I just wish people would stop with the faux concern for marine mammals. 99% of the people complaining about the whale deaths haven't said shit for the last 30+ years of beaching and deaths, mostly caused by collisions with commercial fishing boats and entanglements. And trying to latch onto completely fabricated risks associated with sound surveys (which largely have not been going on and were not going on for previous whale death spikes) and operating windmill vibrations (when none are operating) is ridiculous.
Apparently not everyone is buying the government narrative. A call for an independent investigation into offshore wind energy and data showing how the cable lines affect fluke.
nj1015.com
Fisherman Magazine editor speaks out: NJ wind power impact on whales, dolphins, fishing industry
"We need answers and accountability"
Are you asking people to take the editor of Fisherman Magazine more seriously than the host of marine biology and wildlife experts at NOAA/BOEM, who just issued their report on this last week? The experts have concluded that offshore wind turbines, "may adversely affect whales and other marine mammals, but its construction, operation and eventual dismantling will not seriously harm or kill them."Apparently not everyone is buying the government narrative. A call for an independent investigation into offshore wind energy and data showing how the cable lines affect fluke.
Fisherman Magazine editor speaks out: NJ wind power impact on whales, dolphins, fishing industry
"We need answers and accountability"
Further, the report noted that there would likely be minimal impacts to endangered right whales: "No serious injury or mortality of any (endangered) whale is anticipated as a result of the proposed projec. We do not expect any right whales to be exposed to increased sound levels that would result in injury; all effects to right whales will be limited to temporary behavioral disturbance. Additionally, no effects to the features of right whale critical habitat are anticipated."
https://abc7ny.com/offshore-wind-farm-new-jersey-whale-deaths-noaa/13091752/
Fixed your quoting error. We've had numerous independent investigations and scientific studies by the government and academics, with all of them (as far as I've seen) concluding little to no risk from offshore windmills, so what would be the point of another study? And please enlighten the board with your take on "misinformation" you think I spread - I'm not aware of any.
I've also been open to all information and theories, but have yet to see anything showing any connection between windmills and marine mammal deaths - show something convincing and perhaps some of us will change our minds, but the opinions of a fisherman certainly hold little weight, especially without any solid evidence in his comments. And if this thread only featured posts by marine biologists it would be pretty short, plus, I don't think fishermen have any more credibility than people with PhDs in chem/environmental eng'g and 30+ years solving complex scientific problems with numerous patents and peer-reviewed scientific papers. You're welcome to disagree on the last point, but most would not.
They weren't killing whales before.
:)
That's nice of you to fix my quoting error.
Well, for starters, I have several friends and relatives who work in high level positions in the medical, scientific and pharmaceutical fields. Many of your posts and opinions on covid contradicted what they said about it.
I've been a recreational salt water fisherman for 30 years. I have felt the effects of many studies done on fishery stocks by the NMFS, which is an office of the NOAA. I have seen the NMFS bow down to commercial interests ($$$) to hurt recreational anglers and use garbage scientific formulas to limit the catch of recreational anglers. I helped create a petition which allowed recreational anglers to take a slot striper fish (24" to 28") as well as their regular 28" striper back in the 90's. I have seen as fish stocks have recovered recreational anglers being punished because they were naturallyharvesting more fish because more fish were available. Anglers were then imposed even harsher restrictions even though the stocks were doing well. I have seen dogfish being protected even though their numbers are incredibly high and this fish eats everything on the bottom. Over the last decade there was reported work being done off the coast in Ocean County and it ruined bottom fishing. So forgive me when I'm skeptical about reports this organization puts out.
With your credentials and a $20, maybe you can buy a drink at the Metuchen Country Club.
Last edited:
- Status
Latest posts
-
-
If you were Gavin, Kentucky for $100K/yr to be backup OR New Mexico State as starter?
- Latest: 66 college avenue
-