this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2024
846 points (89.3% liked)

Political Memes

5965 readers
3434 users here now

Welcome to politcal memes!

These are our rules:

Be civilJokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.

No misinformationDon’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.

Posts should be memesRandom pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.

No bots, spam or self-promotionFollow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 3 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] homesweethomeMrL@lemmy.world 14 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Yeah he should really pull back on that giant "produce oil" lever he's got on the Resolute desk with the presidential seal on the handle.

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

Or, you know, treat the climate apocalypse seriously.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

How do you propose Biden stop shale drillers on private property in Texas and New Mexico? Well he signed a massive investment in green energy and infrastructure that can help renewable technologies compete more effectively with fossil fuels. Should more immediate and drastic action happen? I believe so, but Biden can't do that without a Congress that agrees. Elect more Democrats to Congress

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

Weird how when there's a Conservative in charge they have unlimited power to ruin the country, but the dems hands are so tied, he couldn't possibly have done anything to stop the big bad oil companies.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 13 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Weird how it's easier to break something than to build something

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Could he not break the fossil fuel industry then?

[–] protist@mander.xyz 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

He really can't. Breaking the fossil fuel industry would require building a regulatory framework to do so, which would require congressional action. On the other hand, directing federal agencies to stop enforcing existing regulations and making internal decisions to undermine federal oversight of industry (aka breaking the regulatory framework) is much easier.

Also, when gas prices go up people get angry

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

So instead of fighting against the system that's actively destroying the environment, you decide to advocate for business as usual.

When the lesser of two evils is still an apocalypse, it's time to change the system.

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world -3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Any time I see a comment that says "oranges" and then there's a comment below it that says "ah, so you're saying 'pineapples'. What a shit take, fuck pineapples."it turns out to be you, lately. Curious.

Breaking the fossil fuel industry would require building a regulatory framework to do so,

no, he can charge them with espionage, seize their assets, and make them fight it in a fisa court where they can't see the evidence.

[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)
[–] Atom@lemmy.world 12 points 1 year ago (1 children)

The EPA was stripped of its power to regulate carbon emissions in 2022. Congress would need to pass another Clean Air Act for them to do anything. Even then with the Chevron precedent about to be overturned in the coming weeks, the EPA will have the authority to do...not a god damned thing.

https://www.npr.org/2022/06/30/1103595898/supreme-court-epa-climate-change

[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

the same supreme Court which just got undermined in Hawaii?

make em do it again.

[–] Atom@lemmy.world 5 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

How? Hawaii has a state constitution backing their decision. What can the EPA do? Say they Regulate climate emissions and ban oil extraction tomorrow. What happens? Texas and the other red oil producing states just fall in line? They say "gosh, I guess they can tell us what to do even though my boys on the cout said they can't, oh well, we lose"

Of course not. Blue states tend to not need to be told what to do and are often the ones making the standards that are later imposed by the EPA nationally (see CARB standards still regulating MPG for example). So the EPA will be telling red states what to do, with no authority to do so and you seriously think they will just...do it? In what universe do you live, because I'd sure like to be there.

[–] bigMouthCommie@kolektiva.social -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

>So the EPA will be telling red states what to do, with no authority to do so and you seriously think they will just…do it?

not red states. people. they will have to shell out for lawyers, and get a court date, and until then, they won't be polluting.

but lets say that biden can't find anyone at the epa willing to defy the impotent court: he could just use his national security powers.

but he won't because he doesn't actually care to fix things.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 3 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Which has the power to do what in this case?

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You would think, based on the name, protect the environment.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 5 points 1 year ago (1 children)

If you're judging agencies by their names rather than the powers given to them through enacted legislation, I guess I don't know what to tell you

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world -1 points 1 year ago (2 children)

So instead of focusing on giving the EPA more power to do their job, what has he been doing for the past 4 years?

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 4 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Congress is the one who could restore power to the EPA.

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world -2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe they should start paying attention too?

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 2 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe they would, if we got enough democrats in office to overrule the regressivist Republicans.

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Maybe isn't good enough, I'm afraid. Also, aren't they the majority?

[–] Cryophilia@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Dems have a bare sliver of a majority in the Senate, and are in the minority in the House of Representatives.

In any case, most legislation requires more than a simple majority. You need a filibuster-proof majority (60 Senators). Anything less that a majority in the house and 60 Senators requires compromise with Republicans, who are famously resistant to any compromise.

That's the end game for people who truly want to see good things in the world. Majority in the House + 60 Senators + President.

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 0 points 1 year ago

And a bit of record shattering oil production and genocide is cool as long as you get there? Fuck off lol.

[–] protist@mander.xyz 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Executive Order creating the Office of Environmental Justice, among other things

Setting new greenhouse gas limits for coal and gas power plants

These are just the first two things I found in a search, you're welcome to continue learning about what his administration has actually done on this

[–] Nudding@lemmy.world 1 points 1 year ago

So, not enough. Thanks.