Do you think that the "Governator" will ban large screen TVs?

I hate those anyway. I like small, 21 inch old style tv’s – with good stereo sound. Oh, did I mention I’m nearly blind?

Why would he ban them anyways? Ah, saving energy.

@NewZen You have a personality for each of your avatars?

but but but, he’s a republican!

I have an avatar for each personality.

I’d like to know with what justification he’d be able to enact a law along those lines. It seems to me that a more effective measure would be EDUCATING people about the issues surrounding energy conservation, like encouraging people to purchase smaller, less wasteful sets, or showing the benefits of making sure lights and televisions are off when they aren’t in use, and so on and so forth.

@TitsMcGhee That might take too much energy to do, addictions are more powerful.

Wow! I guess he’s just tired of looking at himself. I was tired of looking at him when he was in Kindergarten Cop.

@NewZen I have an avatar for each personality.

Are you sure that it isn’t an personality for each avatar?

@DarkScribe Listen you hunky sexmachine – it’s a chicken and egg thing. ~

I suppose to enforce it, state employees would go door-to-door, driving, to check identify who has a large screen television? Why don’t they just make it one TV per household? The IQ of all children in the state would go us as well…

I did a search, but I couldn’t find any sources other than the one you provided. Could you find a few more sources for us? I’m not personally familiar with the Sydney Morning Herald, so I can’t asses it’s validity.

On a side note, today my father told me that “Obama wants to outlaw incandescent light bulbs because they aren’t energy efficient. I couldn’t find a source for that one either.

@bingo I did a search, but I couldn’t find any sources other than the one you provided.

Reuters it was on the link that I provided. Like most world news, Australian news other than local usually comes from Associated Press or Reuters.

Here’s the story from the LA Times

After reading the article that @PandoraBoxx linked to, I see why it is a good idea and why people might support that, but I’m still confused about what legal justification that a ban/restriction like that would be able to cite.

@bingo
Another one for you here

Sorry, Pandora beat me to it.

California already has more stringent car standards than the rest of the country. These are manufacturing standards for televisions sold in CA, and it appears to have little or nothing to do with Arnold.

@PandoraBoxx it appears to have little or nothing to do with Arnold.

Other than as Governor he would normally be expected to sign off on it or oppose it.

The indications given are that he approves of it. If he doesn’t I guess that will become apparent soon enough.

Right. But it hasn’t been voted on yet.

why not just get rid of the illegals….. that would solver a good many problems.

@kibaxcheza: Wtf. Don’t threadjack.

@kibaxcheza why not just get rid of the illegals….. that would solver a good many problems.

Yeah – they’d take their large screen TVs and gas guzzling cars with them.

along with their tax evasion, murder rate, rape rate, other assorted crime rates, and other such issues.

Dont even try @DarkScribe there is no way you’ll beat me on this topic. Ive written 5 papers on this topic. 3 of them won awards, and 2 of them received offers to be taken as official grievance in state and possibly federal legislature.

But go ahead my friend; stand your ground here and be reduced to cannon fodder.

@kibaxcheza: The point is, the thread is not about immigrants, legal or not. It’s about energy conservation and the ways California is trying to brainstorm ways to help the energy issue. Simply “getting rid” of “the illegals” isn’t a plausible solution to the ENERGY CRISIS. STFU, no one was asking for your credentials on an unrelated topic.

@kibaxcheza stand your ground here and be reduced to cannon fodder.

You don’t know what cannon fodder is – do you?

@kibaxcheza
i smell a liar

i’ve written 200 papers on that and 300 of them got awards and a nobel prize

@kibaxcheza Ive written 5 papers on this topic. 3 of them won awards, and 2 of them received offers to be taken as official grievance in state and possibly federal legislature.

Which white power organisation is your alma mater?

@kibaxcheza Ive written 5 papers on this topic. 3 of them won awards,

What awards did your ravings win?

@DarkScribe
The Triple Gold Star of the Grand Wizard

@kibaxcheza

Pssst. (I am standing my ground…)

If no one cares then how come they were picking apart what i said?
i think someone is just a wittle fwustered

Face it, It is sufficiant to say that sending them back to where they came from would bring a large ease to many problems. Lowering energy consumption is one of them.

It makes a helluva lot more sense then getting rid of TV’s. Thats like banning Hummers because they suck up gas….

Why dont you just find more efficient ways of producing energy? makes more sense than getting rid of stuff people enjoy.

and the awards were just some POS high school writing competition ribbons. Nothing prestigious, go ahead and make fun of me for that or say what you will. I dont care.

and not very well. You asked me for a definition, and called me a racist…. grats, youre being really pathetic.

Does anyone know who he is talking to or what he is talking about?

@kibaxcheza and the awards were just some POS high school writing competition ribbons.

A High School that awards racism? I doubt it.

@DarkScribe Does anyone know who he is talking to or what he is talking about?

sorry imm be cool like you can re-write everything ever said

the last two paragraphs were the only ones directed toward you there ray charles

@DarkScribe and the awards were just some POS high school writing competition ribbons.

A High School that awards racism? I doubt it

im not a racist. Like i said before, i hate everyone. You have to think one race is better to be a racist. I think everyone is a piece of shit. Get it straight.

And i was awarded because the were very strong, well written, and had solid evidence that created indisputable logic. You’re horrible at this game Ray Ray. That and they were written 2 and 3 years ago when Illegal Immigration was a real problem in that area.

dont look now, but i do believe youre losing.

[Mod says:] Please stay on topic. Further off topic responses will be removed.

I think this is fine. They aren’t proposing a ban on large TVs, but implementing a more stringent energy standard they’d then be required to meet. As the article @PandoraBoxx linked stated, the same has been done for household appliances of all types over the years. Cars, too. California always seems to be a little ahead of the rest of the US in matters like this.

If I’m paying the bill (Utility) what difference would it make what kind of TV I use…
Now, if the Gov wants to pay my electric bill then he might have a say…

Shouldn’t he ban himself , or at least his cars .
So if he bans them and you already own one , does he pay for your new one ?

@augustlan see thats where youre wrong. Read the first paragraph of the article again….. a ban is exactly what they are proposing…

@kibaxcheza That is a journalist’s interpretation of the result, not what the proposed legislation actually covers. It’s basically fear-mongering. Read the second paragraph again. Also, read the article @PandoraBoxx linked.

too lazy
scanned it once, dont live in Cali, not my problem, ya know?

@kibaxcheza: I find it hilarious that you advised @augustlan to read more closely, then can’t bother to do it yourself. The fact that you were so intent on telling us all about the problems with the “illegals,” and now it’s not your problem. I’d say that the energy crisis and the future of our environment is everyone’s problem.

@kibaxcheza: I said that, if you act like a troll, no one is going to care what you say. And, because I’m a citizen of the United States, I care what happens in every state. Laws in one state can set precedent for others. I care what happens to people I don’t know because I understand the ideals behind laws and the system of government in this country. You can call me a liberal puss, but I call myself a humanitarian. There’s a reason “illegals” come to this country, but that’s an argument for a different thread, because this one has nothing to do with that topic.

keep telling me that getting rid of 3 million people wouldnt lower energy usage. i think its starting to make sense….. no wait, its not. my b.

and if you were so into human rights, why do you advocate this. this is taking our right of having big ass tv’s. why not find more efficient energy, or a better design. once again, youre showing that youre a hypocrite.

@kibaxcheza: I’m gonna be an adult here and end this, because you’re useless to argue with.

@kibaxcheza A) Owning a ‘big ass tv’ is not a right. B) If you already own one, no one is going to take it away. C) As the article clearly states, this legislation will require improving energy standards on all tvs (over 101 centimeters wide) manufactured in the future.

This exact same thing has been done for many other things: refrigerators, dishwashers, ovens, cars, etc. Has anyone been denied the ability to own any of these things? No. Such legislation doesn’t mean such tvs won’t exist, just that they will have to be more energy efficient.

The TVs that he banned are not needed-items. They were just slightly cheaper to build. Other TVs of the same size and resolution are still available.

The environmental cost of a product should be included within it. And if those TVs had that cost added, they’d cost far more than the TVs people are left with now.

[Mod Says:] Folks let’s stick to the topic on hand and stop the flaming. Off-topic or personal remarks will be removed.