Mark Zuckerberg’s Group Trashes Obama, Promotes Wildlife Oil Drilling

mark sucker berg’s political group is
trashing president of bomb a ando bon a care and promoting wildlife oil drilling
i spent all wild this weekend looking into this and there’s one piece i would direct you
to on business insider dot com f_w_ de dot u_s_ f_w_ de being forward describes itself as a nonpartisan entity
dedicated to promoting immigration reform education reform and the
knowledge akon ami cellmark sucker broke the founder of face book actually said
in a recent washington post editorial he said and what is the knowledge economy knowledge economy is an economy based on
education and technology and it’s different than the old economy
which was based on natural resources like oil and gas and if you look at who
supports forward u_s_ marks october the the the
founder of face because i mentioned mercer mayer the c_e_o_ of yahoo bill
gates we all know bill gates read hofmann the founder of linkedin drew
houston the c_e_o_ and founder of dropbox there’s a lot more people and
you can find their pictures on the forward u_s_ website so okay that sounds pretty good it
sounds like there’s some progressive individuals involved in we’re getting away from natural natural
between oil and gas were getting away from that annual connie that’s all great then we have to ask the question why is
it that’s uh… their is a what of money from forward u_s_ being used to trash
president obama and actually promote big oil policies the same policies that
environmentalists who realize we have to get away from oil and gas criticize that is exactly what is being bankrolled
by forward u_s_ and josh israel and gentle with whom of think progress uh… revealed that
forward u_s_’s funding specific attack ads that attack president obama they attack upon a care and they promote the keystone excel
pipeline and drilling in enlarge the alaska national wildlife refuge here’s
an example of an ad which promotes uh… lindsey graham and criticizes president obama funded by this group forward u_s_ whimsey rooms in washington doesn’t he stands up for hav carolina caning can believe an accident health care bill bob dole is now
becoming slogan an israeli been replaced by cd chicago
politics when you think about it i’m not going to be intimidated by this
president what i’m suggesting is are you get the idea so wait a second wives
marks dr birds organization forward what’s what’s progressive about this now
in their defense forward u_s_ also funds another subsidiary which supports democrats it’s called the
council for american side of the aisle and they produced an ad celebrating
alaska senator mark baggage for advocating drilling in the alaska
national wildlife refuge which of a lot of people say we’ve gotta leave that on
touch so what’s going on here but the bottom line
and think progress has concluded this a number of others have concluded this
lewis is a former u_s_ is basically uh… trying to support immigration reform bite basically funding senators on both
sides of the aisle rise to the idea is lets just find it all sorts of people and it doesn’t matter if marcus doctor berger whoever else
personally find somebody like lindsey graham appalling let’s find everybody and just hope we can grease the wheels
for immigration reform and there’s two point of view on this
right one is to get immigration reform to happen we
need boats will say whatever we need to say to get
those votes some people would say well it’s pragmatic right they know that
they’re going to need republicans to get those votes on immigration reform so
what’s the big deal with supporting drilling in the n water others would say the compromising their values if they
even really care about their values and they’re promoting things which are
directly empathetic alot to what most people who support actual real
immigration reform would support means to an end pandering what do you think loses
assertive debriefing of the strategy i can’t speak to any of the other people
on this list but i would say that this does not sound like something bill gates uh… we even be aware of um… you know i think there’s a chance
that a lot of these people involved saw something daylight in this
organization or maybe it was just months after bridge thing to bill gates on
doing this thing or someone who works for them yeah affiliated them with a enact i think
that uh… they probably really having reviewed everything that this
organization is doing they might not pay attention to it at
all but uh… you know i just i think it’s it’s strange that bill gates to be involved in something
like that in the time do you buy that explanation if that were the explanation
they’ve got a grease both side both sides of the aisles and this is just a
means to an end do you think that that’s ok here is that
that well i think that uh… in this case the
means might justify the ends if the ends
involved millions of currently on documented uh… immigrants to become legal and
then become democrats which will lead render lindsey graham people like him
completely moved so only if that is sort of a very long term strategy over the
next ten to fifteen years would this make sense of the nat uh… if you’re a one-issue person like
bloomberg’s kind of like a one-issue gun bright guy and control guy and now where
he’ll support it guy even if he disagrees with them on a lot of other
things if he’s for gun control uh… it’s hard to say amina soccer br
really only cares about immigration i guess that makes sense for him gap of
who are we don’t really have evidence that that’s his number one concern
because he talks about recover the new economy the knowledge economy
which goes oh way from oil and gas which is being promoted by these ads took that i guess to eventually get
immigration reform i don’t like it army dark tens of
thousands eg tens of thousands of armed herb maybe hundreds of thousands of
democratic votes worthwhile by sterling alaska i mean if the result of this
campaign actually ends up uh… destroying the the environment is that worth it uh… i i don’t believe it is because i
think that that uh… there’s other ways to get those votes but in any case what
do you think about this is this a valid strategy creasing both sides and and
going backwards on issues to go forward elsewhere

, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Post navigation

100 thoughts on “Mark Zuckerberg’s Group Trashes Obama, Promotes Wildlife Oil Drilling

  1. You kidding? Facebook is all about advertising and taking your information and selling it. Kiddies and even stupid adults don't understand that Facebook is basically a corporate database which the government and corporations can look at when ever they want and people voluntarily put their information up there, even incriminating information.

  2. I didn't see that way. All I recall is how poorly Facebook stocks were doing because its business was not clearly defined. But now you explain that way, it does make sense.

  3. Wildlife oil drilling? That is some crazy anti-energy term. You drill where there is oil, there is life all over the planet, and if it isn't a farm or human, it is wild. This anti-energy, anti-human ideology is really very evil.

  4. Bill Gates in fucking EVIL. Sterilizing women in Africa if they want food, stop fooling yourself. Mark Zuckerberg is another piece of shit, he sells all your personal info to everyone!

  5. Zuckerberg is promoting a progressive energy policy. It is the anti-energy technology people who are against progress. Obamacare isn't progressive, it is regressive back to tyranny and serfdom. Zuck isn't left or right, he is pro western civilization, which isn't left or right.

  6. I don't think I would put trust in any group that Zuckerberg is any part of.His reputation carries a lot of sleaze.

  7. yeah…its way more important that we get a few gallons of gas for some fat fuck's SUV than to protect large numbers of wild animals that are irreplaceable…to oppose that is just EVIL…/sarcasm over, you're a fucking idiot.

  8. Thank you for the information David, These organizations are nothing better than ALEC promoting profit for a future 'we' won't be able to live in.

  9. Until we have a better and renewable energy source to power cars, Jets, Trucks, were gonna keep using oil because its the cheapest and most convenient. Hopefully within 50 yrs we'll be completely off oil and on solar and fusion but thats gonna take time, until then lets keep drilling.

  10. Lets not talk about the impact of any corporations. Why bother when anything said you do not understand is evil. Then, lets use labels and colors to describe exactly what does go wrong, and who should pay for the damage, or go to jail for it. And while there we make sure every pothead is in jail and no bankers or bad decisions makers have any consequences except more wealth and payoff. Whew, glad I said nothing.

  11. Terrible, short sighted argument. Humans can still 'come first' without luxury items, such as gas SUVs, that we can potentially replace with better technology. Also, if we don't take care of the planet, there's a chance the earth could no longer support humans. So, are you saying you just want everything you want now without regard to what it means for generations to come? Excellent, gold star.

  12. You can't stop using energy for some imaginary future generation which will also not be able to use the energy because of their imaginary future generation. It is nonsense. You use the best energy you have now, and that is what every generation does. That is progress and how you move forward. If people never cut down trees because they wanted to keep them for future generations we never would have discovered coal, and if we didn't use coal we never would have discovered nuclear fusion etc.

  13. These 'progressives' have learned how being outsiders hindered their business.
    They're stepping up to the plate for their new peers, and greasing the wheels for more deals.
    "We say we know what we're doing,
    We don't know a thing.
    It's all in the past now,

  14. Not quite as much of the coal formed long before humans were even around. And these 'imaginary' generations, are only as imaginary as the day of tomorrow is .They are coming. As surely as day follows night.

    That said, we do have to use the best resources available, anything less simplay wont cut it. But some concern for the future generations is not a bad thing.

  15. There is no way that drilling for fossil fuels is our 'best energy source' now. We've been stuck using it far too long, and the costs of using it are becoming far too great. But people think otherwise because it's made companies a ton of money that they spend corrupting politicians to try and de-educate the masses. Thus we get people who believe that it is somehow still our 'best' option. BS.

  16. using energy that we know is harmful with techniques that destroy/ poison the land and kill/ displace thousand of animals when we have clean energy that is proving successful, efficient, and is still making huge advancements is just moronic. people advance through progress, learning, and understanding. it's people like you that would have said "why build house? we have cave!" we want to do what right so we still have a planet in a thousand years time.

  17. I love when it says Lindsay Graham supports South Carolina values. It's funny, because South Carolina is peopled with the offspring of serial slave rapers and traitors to the nation. I just love when people in the Southern Confederate States are held up as people with values. Makes me laugh every time.

  18. so first he makes a website that has fucked this country's youth into being the most ignorant retards on earth, then he pulls this shit?

  19. Concern for pollution is a facade of the anti-energy movement, they oppose all practical sources of energy period.

  20. He has a "political group"? Facebook doesn't even pay taxes! They got money back from from taxpayers.

    And everyone thinks this cheap bastard is so humble for not living a lavish lifestyle but the reality is he's too cheap, he likes to hoard cash, if he was living lavishly at least he would be providing jobs: maid, driver, chef, etc…

  21. Misuse can happen with any operation, including mining for solar panel and wind mill materials. You can't condemn a technology as inherently wrong because you can have an accident. You can ruin huge environments, and they have been, by mining in China for these unpractical energy sources that the Green religion is obsessed with, that doesn't mean you should condemn these Green energies as inherently polluting. Green energy is just a religious obsessions with getting energy from wind and sun.

  22. How does drilling oil destroy the environment? It has been changing for years. I feel that evolution has done more to "destroy" the environment than drilling. The fact is this, oil and fossil fuels are still the cheapest and most effective source of energy we have. We also use oil for more then just energy. We need to continue researching in "clean" energy and slowly we are getting there but to totally get away from fossil fuels will be devastating to the economy to a point we might not recover.

  23. Yea, sorry Zuckerberg, I'm all for immigration reform, but its worthless if we have to let big oil destroy the planet to get it.

  24. Yeah, the people who want to leave a scorthed rotting Earth for future generations just fucking LOVE human-kind, so much so that they would fuck them over in a heartbeat if it meant an extra buck or two.
    Take your shtick elsewhere, people without two brain cells to rub together might want to hear it.

  25. Actually our modern sanitation is one of many human advances that is allowing us to live so much longer than generations past. Please see countries with no sanitation for a reality check on why we need indoor plumbing.

  26. Like David Packman? All these people have Facebook, it is a tool for sharing things on the internet. Perhaps you should go find someone on youtube who doesn't use Facebook, and good luck.

  27. Obama is the most anti western civilization president we have ever had and the first anti-american president.

  28. There is a large anti-energy movement, which is largely an anti-human movement. Very sick stuff. These are the people like bill mckibben of who want to ban essentially all practical energy, which would lead to a massive human extinction. This movement has a religious obsession with obtaining energy from wind and sun and want to ban all practical forms of energy.

  29. There are newer forms of energy such as nuclear fission which are already in production, but solar and wind are extremely unpractical and old technology. Promoting wind and solar is like saying you want to replace steal with wood as the "new" advanced technology.

  30. So it is really about morality. You are really just interested in sacrificing people, because you believe human life is selfish.

  31. That is crazy and evil talk. What does a person "need"? That isn't for you or anybody else to decide and need is not the standard of morality. People have rights and they have a right to make their life the best it can be. That kind of talk is evil and what makes people go stealing other people's stuff, because they don't "need" it. That isn't a morality that is compatible with human life. We need to act in our rational self-interest to make our lives as good as they can be.

  32. Do you believe that climate change is a fabrication or magnification of a small problem? Or rather a real threat that we need to prepare for?

  33. Yeah I know. I understand modern sanitation and antiseptics and soap etc are way more important than facebook. I was just making an exaggerated point because the guy that was talking to me was really obnoxious

  34. Drilling for more oil locally would hardly affect prices if at all, any more than normal. Its all based on a WORLD price of oil, not "charge whatever we want cause we can hur dur!"

  35. I would like a peer review on how fossil fuels are destroying the environment. Destroying was the wrong word to use here. Changing would have been a better one. The thing is that the world changes and when I here asinine liberals complain about how we are hurting the "precious environment" it makes me wonder what goes through there head. The world has been changing for 4.6 billion years. What makes you think it can't adjust now?

  36. The "knowledge economy " cannot replace oil and gas. Without an energy source nothing, literally nothing happens.

  37. I somewhat agree with your original premise that we cannot just fully move off of fossil fuels. However, we can do much more with clean, renewable energy. There is so much untapped potential in our country. Germany does so much with solar power and they are a smaller country that experiences weather similar to Portland, Oregon.

    As for changing or harming the natural environment, this is happening. The BP oil spill was/is a major disaster for the US. The Gulf down there is in tatters.

  38. What is the difference between an oil spill or a major ice storm that destroys houses, removes power for weeks from homes, and destroys cars? I don't see the difference. In both cases you come together as a society and fix the problem. In other countries they don't have the natural resources like we do so we take advantage of them. I am all for the research and easing in to using "cleaner" energy but we just can't jump into it. Fossil fuels aren't that bad if at all.

  39. Fossil fuels such as oil are definitely dangerous for a variety of reasons. Mainly because when spilled oil is a major health hazard. Have you heard about what is going on in Arkansas? Oil companies are hardly regulated and so these type of disasters will continue to occur. It's also harder to hold multinational corporations accountable when they do happen.

  40. I know a few people who'd like to thrash Zuckerberg for Facebook's inflated IPO. He's a one-trick-pony. I doubt he's got anything new to offer the world except for his smug attitude and sense of self-importance. He thinks because he's a businessman that he's suddenly an adviser to world leaders. He's got Donald-Trump syndrome.

  41. "Fossil fuels aren't that bad if at all."

    Coal burning power plants, which make up most of the US's energy source, spew heavy metals and radioactive material into the atmosphere. Even with the admission standards, the air pollution is definitely a health and environmental problem. Not to mention the carcinogens and CO2.

  42. Thousands of ice core samples, incrementally dating back almost 1 million years, do indeed prove that humans are changing the environment. CO2 levels for 99% of that 1 million years never reached over 300 ppm in the atmosphere. But CO2 is approaching 500ppm and will hit 600ppm by 2050, and it coincides exactly with the industrial revolution. No other natural event can account for the CO2. There are over 33,000 peer-reviewed papers supporting human climate change, only 34 were found to disagree.

  43. Ok, one, science doesn't prove anything. If you study science for years you will see it does have many flaws. Feyman pointed those out at times especially during his talk on the oil drop experiment. In climate change we are in doubt of this. One, how much is man affecting it if at all. There is evidence we are but not enough. a couple hundred years is very small to 4.6 billion years. And, is it really bad? Nature has evolved in the past, why would they stop now?

  44. Since when did burning fossil fuels spew radioactive material in the atmosphere? Tc is the lightest radioactive element and that isn't a product from burning fossil fuels which is develop from most carbon and hydrogen.

  45. Wow, that's incredibly simplistic of you. Coal fired power plants destroy a lot more than air visibility< Einstein. It can acidity lakes and rivers, destroying fisheries. And you have no idea how many people suffer from lung cancer or related illnesses compared to unemployment. You're just pulling made-up facts out of your ass. And it's not an either/or or all/nothing proposition.

  46. CO2 is easy to measure. There's no other mechanism that accounts for a 30% increase in 200 years. Coal contains tiny amounts of uranium, barium, thorium, and potassium. You don't know much about science if you don't understand that fossils fuels are biogenic, and that living organisms concentrate various toxic elements and compounds in their tissues. According to the US Energy Dept., areas around coal plants measure over 100 times more rems than around nuclear plants.

  47. Ive always wondered why the right calls Zuckerberg, bill gates, warren buffet, and steve jobs leftists. They're very fiscally conservative. Most wealthy people are. However, some of them are socially liberal because they work in fields that are exposed to diversity, like Hollywood for example (does anyone actually believe Hollywood is liberal?)

  48. Well the Corporate Fascist screwed up.He created Facebook..pretty much created social media and us progressive took over the bitch…we hate corporate fascist…he might have shot his self in the head with the very gun he created…

  49. Dammit Zuckerberg was one of the rich guys that I looked up to. When I saw him, all him as the shining light of innovation like Gates and Jobs and maybe an attitude change in the 1%. Now he's turning into them. I will worship his work as a tech geek however we will disagree in politics.

  50. There is so little radioactive material in coal it doesn't have any affect. Potassium 40 is very low abundance. We use Americium in our smoke detectors. I use Ce 137 when we teach our physics labs. Better come arrest us. The fact is that those radioactive isotopes in coal is irrelevant. And once again, is CO2 really that bad? Species have been evolving for years, why are they going to stop now? I am all for clean energy but we are not there yet.

  51. He doesn't live lavishly, not because he is cheap, but because he knows, should a someone he shares his life with, decide to sue, he would be obligated to keep them in the lifestyle to wish they had become accustom.

  52. Why are you making such an arbitrary and meaningless comparison? Clowns like you always turn the argument into an all-or-nothing proposition. It's not. We can have jobs and cleaner air, it's not one or the other.

  53. "The waste produced by coal plants is actually more radioactive than that generated by their nuclear counterparts. In fact, the fly ash emitted by a power plant—a by-product from burning coal for electricity—carries into the surrounding environment 100 times more radiation than a nuclear power plant producing the same amount of energy." –ScienceAmerican 2007

    CO2 is a greenhouse gas. It's the higher level that's bad, Einstein.

  54. What? Nuclear power plants maintain their waste and there is research being done to develop a better way to store products from nuclear power. Coal plants don't produce dangerous levels of radioactive waste, if they did we will be seeing a lot of deaths but yet we don't. Because of that they are not required to safely store their waste. CO2 is a greenhouse gas, the questions once again is this. Is what is happening now really bad? The environment evolved before, why would it stop now?

  55. Just one example –the UK has a terrible history with coal produced smog. In the 1952 "great smog" over 10,000 people died from respiratory problems. And that number doesn't include the long-term fatalities from cancer.

    Evolution requires 1000's to millions of years. Acidification of the oceans is happening right now, as well as water temp increases. Temperate species like salmon will be pushed further north, with populations greatly reduced. Fisheries will be damages AND MANY JOBS LOST.

  56. The ice ages were pretty abrupt. So was the extinction of the dinosaurs. Sometimes evolution can be abrupt and doesn't require a lot of years. I am not oppose to some regulations or the eventual use of "cleaner" energy. I am oppose to people that just want to get off of coal immediately. That will destroy the economy so bad that we might never get out. After the great smog we have obviously changed some ways so we are evolving.

  57. Environmental change isn't evolution. 99.9% of all species that ever lived are extinct, and the rate of speciation is only slightly higher than the rate of extinction. And I never said anything about going off of coal "immediately." I simply said it isn't free of toxins or health problems. You're just assuming what I'm thinking and what my position is.

  58. How dare him trash our great chairman and leader! DEATH TO HIM! NEVER CRITICIZE OUR GREAT LEADER!!!!! DEATH TO HIM!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *