Environmental problems have political solutions

Greta Thunberg came to Montreal during Canada's last federal election.  Over a million Canadians marched in the streets demanding climate change action.  Then many participants didn't vote and most of the rest voted for a government that increases our dependence on converting fossil carbon into GHG emissions.

I don't blame politicians for poor governance.  I blame voters.

Environmentalists must stop voting for governments we end up protesting.  Instead we must run for office, volunteer, donate money and vote for political environmentalists who have environmental activism experience, not political opportunists who only have words.

If you aren't part of the political solution, then you are part of the environmental problem.

Truth in Advertising: We've done this with pharmaceuticals and food labeling... why not with tech communication and broadcasting?

Example:  Any broadcast or social media can only label themselves "News" if they adhere to a rigorous test of provable facts and evidence.

If it does not, it  cannot call itself "News."  It may call itself Opinion, Thoughts, Musings or Doggy bags, but not 'News.'
Breaking these broadcast rules would results in severe fines, suspensions and license revocations.

The War of the World's broadcast in 1939 resulted in panic, property damages, accidents, injuries ... all because the public didn't know the difference between a show and real Journalism. Broadcasting was heavily regulated for decades after that.

Can we not do the same today? Free speech is one thing... but yelling "Fire!" in a crowded theatre is illegal. 
We can figure this out. Its not that hard.

 sirdroseph wrote:
 
I think that for some folks that is entirely true.
A perceived sense of superiority is a really weird and all encompassing self delusion...

When our differences become top priority, our differences become top priority.

 miamizsun wrote:
 
Me either

me either

I think I've missed something

weeeee! 
I mean meee

You mean it was you all along?! I should have known!

Yes indeed.

I vote no to that. Please not.

take your protein pill and put your helmet on?..

 oldviolin wrote: 
not sure, i can't keep up

not happy when good folks leave

his post the other day was like reading my mind (i was gobsmacked)

made me think about what we are doing

i've been the king of nutty stuff around here and if i've ever caused someone to leave i deeply regret it

bill and rebecca are nice enough to let us come in and cut up and we should be more respectful

this is their baby, their livelihood, and i'm actually worried that it may get compromised

when supporters leave, they bear the brunt and that's not cool

ground control to major tom

 buddy wrote:
 
Take care. See you in the funny pages.

 miamizsun wrote:
 
I don't get it. What happened around here today? Or is this a reference to somewhere else?

 buddy wrote:
 

damn

got DAYM this new sound system rawks.

 miamizsun wrote: 

 oldviolin wrote:
 
Well, I do try to take Solomon's advice...
Proverbs 17:28-  Even a fool, when he keeps silent, is considered wise;
When he closes his lips, he is considered prudent.

 KurtfromLaQuinta wrote:
 
They make soap out of lye...
lies...something...

 buddy wrote:
 
That middle one is tough for me.
Well, four out of five isn't bad.

THINK

Is what I say...
 
Thoughtful
Honest
Intelligent
Necessary 
Kind

 Steely_D wrote:
 
Right. I mean, sprinkle donuts are ok but gold balls? C'mon. Choice gone too damn far!

 oldviolin wrote:
 

Those little decorative gold or silver balls to put on cookies! What’s up with that? 

I'm leaning against banning in general but if Twitter banned itself that might be fun...

Anyway if I was going to ban something it would be something like glitter or Pop Tarts with red white and blue frosting or maybe 
cruel amusements...

 oldviolin wrote: 
yep.  and on top going in, too.  Don't want any vacuums forming higher up.  The rocking / tilting should take care of that from happening, too.