Looks like the days of Liberals being able to extort big businesses at will may soon be coming to an end........

Supreme Court signals interest in hearing a major climate change case that could be a 'nightmare' for liberals

Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse last week called the court 'captured' by the fossil fuel industry

The Supreme Court seemed to signal interest this week in taking up a challenge launched by Hawaii against big oil companies to hold them liable for climate change, and some Democrats are suggesting the high court is "captured" for the fossil fuel industry. 

The Supreme Court on Monday asked the Justice Department to weigh in on a petition to hear a lawsuit brought by the City of Honolulu against major fuel companies including Sunoco, Exxon and Chevron, claiming the companies’ products cause greenhouse gas emissions and global warming without warning consumers about the risks. 

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/supreme...ists-panic

---

I think suing the oil companies is not a productive use of time or resources.

---

I think suing the oil companies is not a productive use of time or resources.

All it amounts to is an attempt to raise energy cost, a backdoor tax so to speak because you know that the energy producers will need to pass that cost along to the consumers. Liberals are dead set on making us live their version of life where everything comes up roses and everything is powered by unicorn farts...... There is no such utopia....... But if we have learned anything by now about the liberal mindset is this, They always shout the loudest because they know in their hearts and soul that a majority of the American people are not listening to them and, that they never give up.

---

I think suing the oil companies is not a productive use of time or resources.

All it amounts to is an attempt to raise energy cost, a backdoor tax so to speak because you know that the energy producers will need to pass that cost along to the consumers. Liberals are dead set on making us live their version of life where everything comes up roses and everything is powered by unicorn farts...... There is no such utopia....... But if we have learned anything by now about the liberal mindset is this, They always shout the loudest because they know in their hearts and soul that a majority of the American people are not listening to them and, that they never give up.

I don't think it would have much of an effect, since Exxon alone had more than 300 billion dollars in revenue and more than 30 billion dollars in net income last year.  They can afford this case a lot better than whoever is suing them.  

But I don't let my judgment of a few crazy liberals cloud my judgment of whether man-made climate change is real.  It's real.

---

All it amounts to is an attempt to raise energy cost, a backdoor tax so to speak because you know that the energy producers will need to pass that cost along to the consumers. Liberals are dead set on making us live their version of life where everything comes up roses and everything is powered by unicorn farts...... There is no such utopia....... But if we have learned anything by now about the liberal mindset is this, They always shout the loudest because they know in their hearts and soul that a majority of the American people are not listening to them and, that they never give up.

I don't think it would have much of an effect, since Exxon alone had more than 300 billion dollars in revenue and more than 30 billion dollars in net income last year.  They can afford this case a lot better than whoever is suing them.  

But I don't let my judgment of a few crazy liberals cloud my judgment of whether man-made climate change is real.  It's real.

Whether you, or anyone, believe climate change is real is not the issue here. If just one entity succeeds in holding the oil companies responsible for it, then that sets a legal precedence which will potentially have big impacts on the common consumer. 

Let’s see if your self-righteousness shines as brightly when your abilities to travel are severely restricted and rationed because governments use that ruling to set onerous limits on the masses. 

Want to fly to Europe for a vacation? Sorry, you depleted your annual air travel fossil fuel usage quota when you attended that funeral last February. Furthermore, our centralized database indicates you’re also approaching the limits of annual gasoline usage.

---

I don't think it would have much of an effect, since Exxon alone had more than 300 billion dollars in revenue and more than 30 billion dollars in net income last year.  They can afford this case a lot better than whoever is suing them.  

But I don't let my judgment of a few crazy liberals cloud my judgment of whether man-made climate change is real.  It's real.

Whether you, or anyone, believe climate change is real is not the issue here. If just one entity succeeds in holding the oil companies responsible for it, then that sets a legal precedence which will potentially have big impacts on the common consumer. 

Let’s see if your self-righteousness shines as brightly when your abilities to travel are severely restricted and rationed because governments use that ruling to set onerous limits on the masses. 

Want to fly to Europe for a vacation? Sorry, you depleted your annual air travel fossil fuel usage quota when you attended that funeral last February. Furthermore, our centralized database indicates you’re also approaching the limits of annual gasoline usage.

Waaaait a minute.  How am I being self-righteous?

And by the way, I stated quite clearly that I do not approve of suing the oil companies.  

---

Whether you, or anyone, believe climate change is real is not the issue here. If just one entity succeeds in holding the oil companies responsible for it, then that sets a legal precedence which will potentially have big impacts on the common consumer. 

Let’s see if your self-righteousness shines as brightly when your abilities to travel are severely restricted and rationed because governments use that ruling to set onerous limits on the masses. 

Want to fly to Europe for a vacation? Sorry, you depleted your annual air travel fossil fuel usage quota when you attended that funeral last February. Furthermore, our centralized database indicates you’re also approaching the limits of annual gasoline usage.

Waaaait a minute.  How am I being self-righteous?

And by the way, I stated quite clearly that I do not approve of suing the oil companies.  

What are you personally doing to fight the climate change you perceive as real?

---

Waaaait a minute.  How am I being self-righteous?

And by the way, I stated quite clearly that I do not approve of suing the oil companies.  

What are you personally doing to fight the climate change you perceive as real?

Great question.  Not that much.  Why do you ask?  

I don't think anyone can do much on their own.  And I don't think we will ever have the collective willpower to do much about anything that isn't an immediate problem.  I think we'll have to suffer through it.  Adapt.  Muddle through.  Like we always do.

---

What are you personally doing to fight the climate change you perceive as real?

Great question.  Not that much.  Why do you ask?  

I don't think anyone can do much on their own.  And I don't think we will ever have the collective willpower to do much about anything that isn't an immediate problem.  I think we'll have to suffer through it.  Adapt.  Muddle through.  Like we always do.

Just always curious to hear what people who complain about it are personally doing to fix it. Answer always seems to mirror what you said.  

I'm not shunning you, as anything you did wouldn't make a difference anyway. If you are truly convinced humans can prevent the natural activity of the solar system, I have some nice property in Sin City off Atlantic I will sell ya for cheap.

---

Whether you, or anyone, believe climate change is real is not the issue here. If just one entity succeeds in holding the oil companies responsible for it, then that sets a legal precedence which will potentially have big impacts on the common consumer. 

Let’s see if your self-righteousness shines as brightly when your abilities to travel are severely restricted and rationed because governments use that ruling to set onerous limits on the masses. 

Want to fly to Europe for a vacation? Sorry, you depleted your annual air travel fossil fuel usage quota when you attended that funeral last February. Furthermore, our centralized database indicates you’re also approaching the limits of annual gasoline usage.

Waaaait a minute.  How am I being self-righteous?

And by the way, I stated quite clearly that I do not approve of suing the oil companies.  

You're not. It was a clumsy use of the term. 

The point I'm trying to make is debating if an oil company has the resources to fight a lawsuit is not issue. They are being sued for the ultimate goal of forcing severe restrictions on the global populace. Climate change advocacy is all well and good until we're forced to ride bicycles to the store and have to burn our own fecal matter to recycle energy in order to stay within assigned energy quotas. Believe me, there are lots of people out there who would like nothing more than to subjugate the masses under such restrictions in order to comply with their agenda. Everyone except themselves, of course. 

On a side note, how the hell does Hawaii hope to sustain itself if tourists aren't burning fossil fuels to spend their billions there? That, in itself, illustrates the abject short-sightedness of their agenda.

---

It's entirely appropriate to ask what we've personally done regarding climate change.
I've installed solar panels and both my cars get 40mpg. I have voted in favor of SunRail, electric buses, Brightline extensions, and things like that.
I have tried to use social media and forums to promote radical solutions like new nuclear power, carbon tax and tariff, ocean seeding, and aerosol albedo modification.

As for using oil companies, if states were able to collect damages from tobacco companies, I don't see how collecting damages from oil companies should be any more difficult. We have internal documents showing that they knew they were warming the atmosphere and that they intentionally funded quacks that would go out and tell us otherwise. Exactly what the tobacco companies did in the 1960s.

However, I'm not in favor of suing them because that only makes fossil fuels more expensive. The fight has to be about making alternative energy less expensive, not making gas more expensive.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

It's entirely appropriate to ask what we've personally done regarding climate change.
I've installed solar panels and both my cars get 40mpg.  I have voted in favor of SunRail, electric buses, Brightline extensions, and things like that.
I have tried to use social media and forums to promote radical solutions like new nuclear power, carbon tax and tariff, ocean seeding, and aerosol albedo modification. 

As for using oil companies, if states were able to collect damages from tobacco companies, I don't see how collecting damages from oil companies should be any more difficult.  We have internal documents showing that they knew they were warming the atmosphere and that they intentionally funded quacks that would go out and tell us otherwise.  Exactly what the tobacco companies did in the 1960s. 

However, I'm not in favor of using them because that only makes fossil fuels more expensive.  The fight has to be about making alternative energy less expensive, not making gas more expensive.

But your average American doesn't suffer much if Tobacco companies have to pay damages.  They will suffer if oil companies have to pay damages.  That's why it won't happen.

---

It's entirely appropriate to ask what we've personally done regarding climate change.
I've installed solar panels and both my cars get 40mpg.  I have voted in favor of SunRail, electric buses, Brightline extensions, and things like that.
I have tried to use social media and forums to promote radical solutions like new nuclear power, carbon tax and tariff, ocean seeding, and aerosol albedo modification. 

As for using oil companies, if states were able to collect damages from tobacco companies, I don't see how collecting damages from oil companies should be any more difficult.  We have internal documents showing that they knew they were warming the atmosphere and that they intentionally funded quacks that would go out and tell us otherwise.  Exactly what the tobacco companies did in the 1960s. 

However, I'm not in favor of using them because that only makes fossil fuels more expensive.  The fight has to be about making alternative energy less expensive, not making gas more expensive.

But you haven't given up your car that drives around on those rubber tires and opted for some form of public transportation, as this would be an inconvenience to you. 

You are clearly not doing everything you can do.

---

It's entirely appropriate to ask what we've personally done regarding climate change.
I've installed solar panels and both my cars get 40mpg.  I have voted in favor of SunRail, electric buses, Brightline extensions, and things like that.
I have tried to use social media and forums to promote radical solutions like new nuclear power, carbon tax and tariff, ocean seeding, and aerosol albedo modification. 

As for using oil companies, if states were able to collect damages from tobacco companies, I don't see how collecting damages from oil companies should be any more difficult.  We have internal documents showing that they knew they were warming the atmosphere and that they intentionally funded quacks that would go out and tell us otherwise.  Exactly what the tobacco companies did in the 1960s. 

However, I'm not in favor of using them because that only makes fossil fuels more expensive.  The fight has to be about making alternative energy less expensive, not making gas more expensive.

But you haven't given up your car that drives around on those rubber tires and opted for some form of public transportation, as this would be an inconvenience to you. 

You are clearly not doing everything you can do.

Mass transit can't succeed unless it serves high density housing.  High density housing is either an apartment or a condo, and either is usually a disaster for your net worth.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

But you haven't given up your car that drives around on those rubber tires and opted for some form of public transportation, as this would be an inconvenience to you. 

You are clearly not doing everything you can do.

Mass transit can't succeed unless it serves high density housing.  High density housing is either an apartment or a condo, and either is usually a disaster for your net worth.

That was a long winded way of saying "I'm a hypocrite."

---

Mass transit can't succeed unless it serves high density housing.  High density housing is either an apartment or a condo, and either is usually a disaster for your net worth.

That was a long winded way of saying "I'm a hypocrite."

Mike doesn't take short cuts in his responses..

---

It's entirely appropriate to ask what we've personally done regarding climate change.
I've installed solar panels and both my cars get 40mpg.  I have voted in favor of SunRail, electric buses, Brightline extensions, and things like that.
I have tried to use social media and forums to promote radical solutions like new nuclear power, carbon tax and tariff, ocean seeding, and aerosol albedo modification. 

As for using oil companies, if states were able to collect damages from tobacco companies, I don't see how collecting damages from oil companies should be any more difficult.  We have internal documents showing that they knew they were warming the atmosphere and that they intentionally funded quacks that would go out and tell us otherwise.  Exactly what the tobacco companies did in the 1960s. 

However, I'm not in favor of suing them because that only makes fossil fuels more expensive.  The fight has to be about making alternative energy less expensive, not making gas more expensive.

Not just less expensive, but as widely available, useful and as fungible as petroleum. Ultimately, it will be the markets which find a solution. Forcing compliance will only create hardship and pushback. Plus, it takes time for these ideas to age through living generations who weren't faced with such prospects from an early age. Not to mention the creation and build out of the required infrastructure. 

The world will change, given time.

---

Mass transit can't succeed unless it serves high density housing.  High density housing is either an apartment or a condo, and either is usually a disaster for your net worth.

That was a long winded way of saying "I'm a hypocrite."

Not everyone is going to have a good enough job to get that freestanding home.

A lot of people around here oppose trailer parks and tiny houses.  I don't.  Trailer parks are also part of the solution.  Doesn't mean I personally should live in one.

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.

It's entirely appropriate to ask what we've personally done regarding climate change.
I've installed solar panels and both my cars get 40mpg.  I have voted in favor of SunRail, electric buses, Brightline extensions, and things like that.
I have tried to use social media and forums to promote radical solutions like new nuclear power, carbon tax and tariff, ocean seeding, and aerosol albedo modification. 

As for using oil companies, if states were able to collect damages from tobacco companies, I don't see how collecting damages from oil companies should be any more difficult.  We have internal documents showing that they knew they were warming the atmosphere and that they intentionally funded quacks that would go out and tell us otherwise.  Exactly what the tobacco companies did in the 1960s. 

However, I'm not in favor of suing them because that only makes fossil fuels more expensive.  The fight has to be about making alternative energy less expensive, not making gas more expensive.

Not just less expensive, but as widely available, useful and as fungible as petroleum. Ultimately, it will be the markets which find a solution. Forcing compliance will only create hardship and pushback. Plus, it takes time for these ideas to age through living generations who weren't faced with such prospects from an early age. Not to mention the creation and build out of the required infrastructure. 

The world will change, given time.

Petroleum and fossil fuel may never be replaced for certain things, and that's fine.  But it can be entirely replaced for electricity and for heating most homes.  Now that batteries are cheap, renewable energy with grid storage is going to replace natural gas turbines for electricity in many areas.  However, the Trump-Biden tariffs are greatly slowing down that process here.  Sad!

---

My fellow southpaw Mark Brunell will probably always be my favorite Jaguar.