Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

Brotendo88 t1_itgoix3 wrote

Politicians are always seeking power and creative way to use it. In this instance it seems like Kalus is trying to point towards executive power the governor holds. It also works to discredit McKee who hasn’t done jack shit to stop the rate hikes.

But honestly, voting for governor at this point feels like choosing between the hangman or the firing squad. Both choices suck. Across the state we need a network of organizations to build political power that opposes the Dems and Repubs… anyway

11

argument_sketch t1_itgp76j wrote

So a Republican is talking about the government controlling prices… not against it, just doesn’t sound very free market for a conservative.

28

nathanaz t1_ith8svk wrote

Kind of like how they think if the US increases production of oil we can be self-sufficient, in terms of our gas needs/prices.

They leave out the middle part where the government would have to take over oil production, refinement and transport to ensure that the oil/gas stays here and doesn’t get sold on the global market. Essentially they’re advocating for communism while yelling about how much they love freedom.

12

mpm4q2 t1_ithcesb wrote

Won’t happen. The oil prices are determined by the global market. The only way to influence the prices is to pump more and flood the market. The government must stay out of the way or they will screw it up.

−4

nathanaz t1_ithxweg wrote

My comment wasn’t a prescription, it was an illustration of the hypocrisy.

9

mpm4q2 t1_ithzua0 wrote

This is the republican platform for the fuel crisis

−5

nathanaz t1_iti02xl wrote

Yeah. That’s why it’s hypocrisy. I don’t know what you’re not understanding

5

gusterfell t1_itihl7t wrote

How exactly do the Republicans plan to get the oil producers to "pump more," when they're currently making record profits by not pumping more and driving up the price?

Oil companies are currently sitting on dozens of unused drilling permits that they could act on tomorrow with no change in government. They have no desire to "pump more."

5

mpm4q2 t1_itiinmu wrote

Btw, those permits are unused because there is no oil there. Just because you have a permit doesn’t mean that there will be oil to drill there!!

2

gusterfell t1_itim1pe wrote

That's absurd. Why would anyone go through the permitting process to drill on land without oil reserves?

Regardless, that doesn't answer the question of how the GOP would get the oil companies to drill more and flood the market, reducing their own profit margins in the process? Seems pretty hard to do without some of that nasty government regulation.

2

argument_sketch t1_itimo66 wrote

Republicans are always against regulation because they don’t care about our future. As long as we’re all fat and happy with our low oil and gas prices, they don’t care that our children and grandchildren will grow up with the destructive results of climate change.

How about I throw all the toxic waste I produce over into your yard instead of disposing it properly for more expense? Because if you wanna stop me, that’s OVER-REGULATION!

I’ve never seen anybody more shortsighted than a republican

3

mpm4q2 t1_itim5nu wrote

That’s not how it works my friend.

1

Hot-Cry920 t1_itjacb2 wrote

Then why does biden take credit when gas prices come down??? Guys all over the place

−2

mpm4q2 t1_itiig1x wrote

Now where did you hear that? Boy some people believe anything they are told. The oil companies will drill and produce more if they know the administration won’t interfere with more over regulation. It’s hard to get investors when the president says that he wants to put them out of business!

−3

sriracha_Salad OP t1_itgrmwb wrote

I mean looking at the map in the paper there's only one natural gas pipeline coming in from Connecticut- so I am not sure how much you can go against the free market in this case.

11

therealDrA t1_itgs0gt wrote

Yes, this is a major limitation in New England. Kalus is a stupid right wing hack.

36

growupandblowawayy t1_itgu1dv wrote

I agree. The choices are limited, but we shouldn’t give into the “I dunno” pressure. Republicans have a bad agenda. And if we let that come into Rhode Island, which is already pretty bad for a ‘liberal’ state, it will get exponentially worse.

At this point reproductive rights are on the chopping block along with body autonomy DUE TO REPUBLICANS. let me reiterate, REPUBLICANS ARE TAKING AWAY BASIC HUMAN BODY AUTONOMY RIGHTS. it’s disgusting through and through. Who knows what’s next.

24

therealDrA t1_ith59ca wrote

Under his eye

6

[deleted] t1_ithc99s wrote

[deleted]

−1

therealrihawk t1_ithiqwj wrote

You're missing a reference to the handmaids tale. He isn't referring to McKee

6

dman_usa t1_iths3hl wrote

wrong again please stop watching lefist media

−8

growupandblowawayy t1_ithso3q wrote

I will when you stop doing your “own” Facebook research.

4

dman_usa t1_ithvnzr wrote

i do go on facebook LOL nice try. Question for you though. If the Democratic party was for abortion, why didn’t they codify Roe V Wade into law? They had 50 years to do so?

−5

growupandblowawayy t1_iti0w34 wrote

You’re admitting to listening to Facebook research? That’s your education? Facebook? Are you stupid? Roe v wade will be put into law now that it’s been repealed and questioned. That’s your answer. I hope you watch the news and read a few articles that are not fox.

5

dman_usa t1_iti1l42 wrote

huh? what are you even saying? LMFAO i dont have a facebook account, dont watch fox news, cnn msnbc or any news stations. I don’t need to. You sure are a democract cuz you dodged that question pretty good

−7

growupandblowawayy t1_iti24hk wrote

I am not a democrat and literally answered your question and said that’s your answer. You have the reading comprehension of a toddler

3

dman_usa t1_iti2svh wrote

Roe V Wade was a terrible court case and was doomed to be overturned. Abortion is not a right and never will be and the overturning of Roe V Wade was a great decision. These allows voters to have a greater say on whether or not they want abortion to be allowed in their states.

Your insults don’t faze me

−1

growupandblowawayy t1_iti3t5n wrote

Please elaborate how overturning roe was good. I want to know. In EXPLICIT details. Let me know how preventing an abortion from a unwanted pregnancy is good.

3

dman_usa t1_iti651z wrote

I will. Roe V Wade was too vague and certain States were passing laws that allowed abortion all the way up to nine months.

The Arguments for Roe that abortions would be safe, rare, and legal in 1973. Since than abortions were the opposite. The United States Constitution does not guarantee women the right to an abortion. The right to abortion did not outweigh the right to life which all human not here in America, but all across the world have a right to.

Abortion should be outlawed in all 50 states with no exceptions whatsoever, because the right to life outweighed the right to abortion, which is an imaginary right, that never existed. The United States Constitution again, does not guarantee a woman the right to end, another person’s life.

Hopefully, in the next 20 years abortion will be eradicated in the United States of America, and the right to life is upheld and honored by our government

−2

growupandblowawayy t1_iti6vee wrote

Gotcha. This is where we will always disagree. I don’t think a nut in a pussy warrants some instant right to life. You do you standing up for the right of sperm having a right to vote or whatever.

6

dman_usa t1_iti7hcq wrote

Gotcha. So you don’t believe in individual responsibility do you?

0

growupandblowawayy t1_iti7roa wrote

I do? Why

2

dman_usa t1_iti8apn wrote

because if you believe in individual responsibility and auto factor in that having unprotected sex, with multiple partners can lead to a birth of another human life. Believing in individual responsibility is also anti-abortion, because having unprotected sex can cause another human life which than the man and the women must owe up to the consequences of their actions. Advocating for unprotected sex with multiple partners and just saying if the women become pregnant, she can have an abortion is not advocating for an individual responsibility.

1

growupandblowawayy t1_iti8r2x wrote

I believe that it’s a bad means to and end to force irresponsible people to birth. Do you really want people suffering like that? They themselves don’t. Let them have sex. We don’t need more orphans or baby drug addictions.

Btw I’m done talking to you. Go try to convert a homeless person or someone from your church to vote for R. Any reasonable person won’t.

2

dman_usa t1_iti94wa wrote

Correct so that’s why we should be advocating for a safe and responsible sex and not sex with multiple irresponsible partners

2

growupandblowawayy t1_iti9j45 wrote

It’s not realistic and never will be. We need abortion as a means of protecting for multiple reasons. A ban on it is archaic.

2

SoftwareDev401 t1_itiktxn wrote

I feel like MOST of the Republicans in this state are moderate fiscal conservatives who want to see the Dems stop giving taxpayer money to everything they possibly can. I would never vote Republican at the federal level because of the absurd impact they have on things that should not be their business. (Women's bodies, gay rights, etc.) But the democratic machine in this state has given away everything to everyone. People move here to take advantage of it.

1

SoftwareDev401 t1_itikup3 wrote

I feel like MOST of the Republicans in this state are moderate fiscal conservatives who want to see the Dems stop giving taxpayer money to everything they possibly can. I would never vote Republican at the federal level because of the absurd impact they have on things that should not be their business. (Women's bodies, gay rights, etc.) But the democratic machine in this state has given away everything to everyone. People move here to take advantage of it.

0

growupandblowawayy t1_itkc98z wrote

I live in Newport. Tell me about it. A lot of “fiscal” republicans or covert republicans. There’s gotta be a point that you realize the party won’t preserve your wealth.

Edit

And I believe that your voice at state levels reaches the federal. I don’t believe in voting d federally and r locally. That’s prob why ri is such a corrupt and messed up “democratic” state, most people here are not democrat and are from Ny or NJ avoiding taxes or some bs.

2

Opticalpopsicle1074 t1_itlxio0 wrote

I’m not a Republican but let’s be honest, the democrats are also taking away bodily autonomy. This we have seen aggressively over the last two years. Never thought the democrats would lose their values like that but yet, here we are. So maybe this is not a democrat/republican thing but a government overreach problem. It’s almost as if both parties got together and decided that if they work together to represent corporate interests over individual citizens that they would be more successful. It’s very important that people keep their rights over medical decisions over their own bodies. Those rights are slipping away. And it’s both parties participating in that.

−2