Jet Offensive

Other Stuff => The Pats-Hater Parking Lot => Topic started by: Badger on October 17, 2013, 04:30:42 PM

Title: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 17, 2013, 04:30:42 PM
Cory Booker was elected to the Senate today, as if that race was ever in question.

In honor of that, I present my favorite moment of Hurricane Sandy:

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/853722/thumbs/o-CORY-BOOKER-HOT-POCKETS-570.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 17, 2013, 04:36:43 PM
I keep forgetting that I now live in New Jersey and should somewhat care about its politics.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 17, 2013, 04:39:22 PM
I keep forgetting that I now live in New Jersey and should somewhat care about its politics.
I liked Rush Holt more than Booker but I like Booker a lot more than Lonegan. Didn't matter since I can't vote in NJ anyway.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 05, 2013, 08:45:13 PM
NBC is calling Virginia for McAuliffe. As a card carrying pinko I'm glad that the state has rejected the right wing nutbar, but McAuliffe sounds like a thoroughly unpleasant character as well.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2013, 08:48:56 PM
NBC is calling Virginia for McAuliffe. As a card carrying pinko I'm glad that the state has rejected the right wing nutbar, but McAuliffe sounds like a thoroughly unpleasant character as well.

Did the real media report it yet?

NBC is pretty much the incarcerated bob of news media
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 05, 2013, 08:52:14 PM
The only other place I've seen calling it is HuffPo, which means nothing.

Edit: Fox have apparently called it for McAuliffe as well.

Edit: And CNN.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2013, 09:00:05 PM
Sounds like Christie is one step closer to becoming president
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 05, 2013, 09:10:06 PM
NBC is calling Virginia for McAuliffe. As a card carrying pinko I'm glad that the state has rejected the right wing nutbar, but McAuliffe sounds like a thoroughly unpleasant character as well.

(http://dryislandcastaways.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/turddouche.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 05, 2013, 09:18:42 PM
Sounds like Christie is one step closer to becoming president

Still got a freak of a long way before then, but I'd love to see a candidate like Christie for the Republican party. I don't agree with all of his views but I respect his willingness to call out partisan bullshit for what it is, and I would think and hope that he could actually work with both sides of the house if he were successful. I fear that he'll get pilloried for being a RINO if or when he actually runs, though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2013, 09:24:57 PM
Cant say I know much about Christie's politics, but the guy is seemingly amiable, incredibly blunt,  and from what I can tell is one of the more moderate republicans
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 05, 2013, 09:26:19 PM
I don't think Christie is a viable option for President. Another guy who'd make a better candidate than actually holding the office.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2013, 09:36:53 PM
I don't think Christie is a viable option for President. Another guy who'd make a better candidate than actually holding the office.

Thats what politics in this country have turned to

Obama, McCain, Palin

None of these people have any business being in the white house, they're just ideal candidates

Far as im concerned the US presidency has become no different from American Idol, its just freaking retarded
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 05, 2013, 10:45:52 PM
Thats what politics in this country have turned to

Obama, McCain, Palin

None of these people have any business being in the white house, they're just ideal candidates

Far as im concerned the US presidency has become no different from American Idol, its just freaking retarded

Obama and McCain don't belong in the same thought as Palin.

McCain was and is now again a great senator.  If the nutballs hadn't forced him to go so far right he would have stood a chance.

Obama didn't have the pedigree or the experience, but he was the best choice to run in a weak derriere field.  Hillary wasn't ready yet at all.

At the end of the day Hillary will likely score a very close win over Christie in 2016.  Neither side has anyone else that could run with any hope of winning at this point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 05, 2013, 10:48:55 PM
I don't think Christie is a viable option for President. Another guy who'd make a better candidate than actually holding the office.

Reminds me of Obama. The guy ran a hell of a campaign.

I think Christie would be a great President. Hopefully by 2016 the Christian Conservatives won't kill his chances. Christie could very well take votes away from Hillary Clinton.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2013, 10:54:43 PM
Obama and McCain don't belong in the same thought as Palin.

McCain was and is now again a great senator.  If the nutballs hadn't forced him to go so far right he would have stood a chance.

Obama didn't have the pedigree or the experience, but he was the best choice to run in a weak derriere field.  Hillary wasn't ready yet at all.

At the end of the day Hillary will likely score a very close win over Christie in 2016.  Neither side has anyone else that could run with any hope of winning at this point.

Maybe Mcain doesnt, Obama definitely does.

Some gimmicky extremist bullshit, under qualified, purely in it because of their looks and personality (also because neither of them were white men)

The only reason he got elected was because people hated Bush, the only reason Palin got the nod was because McCain was extremely moderate and all the people on the right were pissed off (plus they needed someone who wasnt a  white male to go on the ticket)

I never liked McCain, still dont. The guy doesnt know dick about money (neither do any of names mentioned above)

Wasnt big on Romney, but at least he was the only candidate to have a financial background.   Im actually not sure why people on the left hated him so much, he actually was relatively moderate in regards to the typical far right religious bullshit.  (although his comments on "women" made him look pretty effing stupid)



I just hope that whoever the freak gets elected next has an advanced degree in finance/economics with some legitimate business experience. Im tired of this country being run by people who never in a million years could be CEO of a successful company
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 05, 2013, 10:55:25 PM
Reminds me of Obama. The guy ran a hell of a campaign.

I think Christie would be a great President. Hopefully by 2016 the Christian Conservatives won't kill his chances. Christie could very well take votes away from Hillary Clinton.

I agree with this.  As long as he doesn't have to go too far right to get the nomination he would have a chance.  He is a true moderate conservative.  To be honest, with as far right as the republicans have gone, the whole Clinton family could be considered moderate conservatives these days.

The only place where Christie could get called out is social issues.  His own supreme court shot down his veto on gay marriage, and the voters tonight shot down his veto of increasing the minimum wage.  Those are the types of issues that could come back to haunt him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 05, 2013, 10:56:13 PM
Reminds me of Obama. The guy ran a hell of a campaign.

I think Christie would be a great President. Hopefully by 2016 the Christian Conservatives won't kill his chances. Christie could very well take votes away from Hillary Clinton.
Maybe if they pair him with a smart, level-headed guy for VP. But I don't trust that to happen. It would probably end up being some freaking dingbat meant to appeal to the crazies, thus rendering the ticket unelectable for me again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 05, 2013, 10:58:56 PM

...nonsense...

Wasnt big on Romney, but at least he was the only candidate to have a financial background.   Im actually not sure why people on the left hated him so much, he actually was relatively moderate in regards to the typical far right religious bullshit.


His financial background consisted of robbing people blind.  His political background consisted of working on a (very) short leash as governor of a blue state.  But that made him more qualified?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2013, 11:01:03 PM
His financial background consisted of robbing people blind.

He would fit in well with our government then, dont you think ?


And yes I would take a business leader, over a career politician everyday.


Because business leaders actually have to do a good job or they get fired.


Meanwhile politicians do excrement, and continue to do excrement for their entire lives.



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 05, 2013, 11:03:16 PM
Maybe if they pair him with a smart, level-headed guy for VP. But I don't trust that to happen. It would probably end up being some freaking dingbat meant to appeal to the crazies, thus rendering the ticket unelectable for me again.

It will be tough finding a good VP on either side.  There a couple great female VP options on the dem side, but I don't think a 2 female ticket would stand any chance at all.  If Booker is light's out the next couple years he could be a viable option.

The rep side is a bloody mess.  I have no idea where they would go.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 05, 2013, 11:03:45 PM
Maybe if they pair him with a smart, level-headed guy for VP. But I don't trust that to happen. It would probably end up being some freaking dingbat meant to appeal to the crazies, thus rendering the ticket unelectable for me again.

As far as I'm concerned, the VP is a nonissue. Who cares? Biden was only selected to counter Obama's lack of foreign policy experience. Btw I always found it funny how the public and media blasted Palin for her lack of foreign policy experience yet completely ignored Obama's nonexistant expertise. You know, the guy actually running for the job.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 05, 2013, 11:05:11 PM
Because business leaders actually have to do a good job or they get fired.

How many times was Romney fired for running a business into the ground?  Oh, that's right.  NEVER.  They would just liquidate the company's assets and walk away a few million richer.

Seriously don't go there man.  You'll just look stupider than normal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2013, 11:06:19 PM
One of the names on the right most worth getting excited about imo is Carly Fiorina.

Shes a tough as balls chick, with some heavy business/finance knowledge who is all about simplifying the tax code and helping small businesses.

Cant say what her opinion on social issues are, but im not one of those freaking retards who thinks the single most important qualification for the leader of the free world is their opinion on sticking a plunger in your vagina or if two dudes should make out or not.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 05, 2013, 11:06:38 PM
As far as I'm concerned, the VP is a nonissue. Who cares? Biden was only selected to counter Obama's lack of foreign policy experience. Btw I always found it funny how the public and media blasted Palin for her lack of foreign policy experience yet completely ignored Obama's nonexistant expertise. You know, the guy actually running for the job.

The difference is that Palin is a moron and Obama is the opposite.  Obama chose Biden for just the reason you mentioned.  That's smart.  Palin offered nothing to McCain other than the crazy vote.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 05, 2013, 11:07:37 PM
One of the names on the right most worth getting excited about imo is Carly Fiorina.

Shes a tough as balls chick, with some heavy business/finance knowledge who is all about simplifying the tax code and helping small businesses.

Cant say what her opinion on social issues are, but im not one of those freaking retards who thinks the single most important qualification for the leader of the free world is their opinion on sticking a plunger in your vagina or if two dudes should make out or not.


Actually, the last sentence is exactly what makes you a retard.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 05, 2013, 11:11:32 PM
The difference is that Palin is a moron and Obama is the opposite.  Obama chose Biden for just the reason you mentioned.  That's smart.  Palin offered nothing to McCain other than the crazy vote.

McCain needed someone the conservatives could get behind. That was smart on his part too. Had the economy not started to shift downward, McCain would have had a legit shot. The country wanted a change.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2013, 11:11:36 PM
How many times was Romney fired for running a business into the ground?  Oh, that's right.  NEVER.  They would just liquidate the company's assets and walk away a few million richer.

Seriously don't go there man.  You'll just look stupider than normal.
How many times was Romney fired for running a business into the ground?  Oh, that's right.  NEVER.  They would just liquidate the company's assets and walk away a few million richer.

Seriously don't go there man.  You'll just look stupider than normal.

If people dont like Romneys political views thats more than fine, but dont insult the guy as a businessman. Hes absolutely freaking brilliant, guy has a doctorette in law from Harvard and and MBA in business from their. Then went on to make 250 million dollars +

Just because you dont approve of the way he made his money (dissolving companies) doesnt mean that he was an idiot. Its not like he was Bush who just inherited millions from his father
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2013, 11:13:34 PM
Actually, the last sentence is exactly what makes you a retard.

Because I dont have any respect for people who harp on social issues ?

Boo hoo


Says the guy who thinks Romney is a bad business man because he made hundreds of millions of dollars
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 05, 2013, 11:14:57 PM
Not that she'd ever come back to politics, but I would love to see Condolezza Rice back as Secretary of State, or even VP, but her talents would be wasted in that role. To be honest, I even think she'd make a good president.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on November 06, 2013, 12:08:29 AM
I voted for McCain.  Of course, that was in the 2000 primary...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 06, 2013, 12:50:41 AM
Rant on:

I used to love McCain but he lost my vote for a few reasons one of which, he picked a freaking dipshit as a running mate. Palin should be working at a nail salon, that bitch is straight up freaking stupid. McCain is/was a hard as nails real life hero, he deserved better.

Now the Republican party is a caricature of a fascist, cross carrying Brown shirted tea party nut ball. They ain't getting my vote till they get some real people running that asylum. The tea party held a God damned gun to the country's head last month for no good reason other than ego. freak them a million times over.

I hear every freaking day complete morons at work tell me how great the tea party and republicans are and not once was it a legitimate concrete reason on how they will make this country better. All it amounts to is, " at least they aren't Obama". Just like Germans at one time said " at least this guy is younger than Hindenberg". freak that noise.

I am buying a box of grenades if I hear one more time how those mother fuckers are great Americans and people that don't buy their ignorant elitist rhetoric are liberals. freak those arrogant scumbags. I ain't no liberal and most people that despite the party that should be an alternative aren't as well.

Please just once, once can we get a party with a candidate and agenda that gives two shits what effects Americans and is tasked with making our lives better.

Oh and freak the Democrats as well.

Rant over:

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 06, 2013, 06:49:35 AM
McCain needed someone the conservatives could get behind. That was smart on his part too. Had the economy not started to shift downward, McCain would have had a legit shot. The country wanted a change.
Palin cost him more votes than she gained. Do you really think the conservative base wouldn't have voted for him with another running mate? This isn't exactly a group of very independent thinkers we're talking about. Who else were they going to vote for? Nader?

It was a disastrous move.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Rexifer on November 06, 2013, 08:27:48 AM
Sounds like Christie is one step closer to becoming president

http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/189378-nj-exit-polling-clinton-tops-christie-in-2016

Quote
CNN exit polls give the former secretary of State (Clinton) 50 percent support to Christie's 43 percent in his home state.

Doesn't sound closer to me. 

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on November 06, 2013, 08:36:13 AM
McCain is a little bit too insane for my liking as a presidential candidate, he's made a pretty fine senator most of his career, though. Even willing to go across party lines and get real work done on campaign finance reform (only for it to be gutted later on, of course).

I see Christie being the Republican candidate with the highest likelihood of getting stuff done and working Congress effectively instead of letting the party work him if he makes it to the White House - but I'm afraid that his personality and moderate record will wreck him in the primary.

But then again, I don't see any other serious candidates stepping forward on the Republican side.


I'm willing to commit to my belief that Hilary will not be the democratic candidate, though. Even though she polls better than everybody right now with her name recognition, I think people will tire of her really quickly considering how much time she's spent in presidential elections already in her career.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 06, 2013, 08:39:16 AM
http://thehill.com/blogs/ballot-box/presidential-races/189378-nj-exit-polling-clinton-tops-christie-in-2016

Doesn't sound closer to me.

Because New Jersey is the single most important swing state in the election

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 06, 2013, 08:41:32 AM
McCain is a little bit too insane for my liking as a presidential candidate, he's made a pretty fine senator most of his career, though. Even willing to go across party lines and get real work done on campaign finance reform (only for it to be gutted later on, of course).

McCain 2000 would have been awesome. By 2008 he seemed like a different person.

I'm willing to commit to my belief that Hilary will not be the democratic candidate, though. Even though she polls better than everybody right now with her name recognition, I think people will tire of her really quickly considering how much time she's spent in presidential elections already in her career.

Sort of reminds me of how a year ago everyone though Christine Quinn would be the next mayor of NYC. Then everyone got sick of her.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 06, 2013, 08:49:12 AM
Palin cost him more votes than she gained. Do you really think the conservative base wouldn't have voted for him with another running mate? This isn't exactly a group of very independent thinkers we're talking about. Who else were they going to vote for? Nader?

It was a disastrous move.
McCain 2000 would have been awesome. By 2008 he seemed like a different person.

Exactly x 1,000,000,000,000. Spot on Dan.

McCain was winning in 2000 until Little Georgie went attack dog in SC and just ran a dirtier seedier campaign. He (Little Goergie) was a great campaigner, I mean if a guy that beg borrowed and stole to get out of Vietnam, so he can snort coke off of hookers funbags can convince the country they are more of a patriot than a guy that was actually in Vietnam during the war, he is one hell of a campaigner, completely full of excrement, but a great campaigner. Man this country is in a huge mess because we voted for that idiot.

Is is possible Georgie Bush was Sarah Palins dad?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on November 06, 2013, 09:16:24 AM
McCain 2000 would have been awesome. By 2008 he seemed like a different person.

Yep.  Exactly what I was getting at with my voting history post.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 06, 2013, 10:15:42 AM
http://www.nj.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/11/nj_voters_approve_constitutional_amendment_raising_minimum_wage.html#incart_river

Quote
TRENTON — New Jersey voters overwhelmingly approved a ballot question today that will raise the minimum wage from $7.25 to $8.25 an hour in January and amends the state Constitution to tie future increases to inflation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 10:26:53 AM
I'm fine with tying the minimum wage to inflation, but it shouldn't just be arbitrarily increased because "it's not enough" or some other stupid reason.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 06, 2013, 10:28:03 AM
I voted for McCain over Obama because I said during the campaign that there was absolutely no way he'd be able to keep most, if any, of his campaign promises. (It hurt to vote for Palin though.) Here we are half a decade later and Guantanamo is still open, we're still fighting a multiple front war in the Middle East, housing is only now starting to rebound (as well as arguably the job market, if you discount underemployment), and healthcare is a bigger mess today than it was 5 years ago.

Still, I voted for Obama over Romney. I don't believe a businessperson should be in charge of the country. I firmly believe that someone who has big ideals and speaks well should be President. In retrospect that would scream Obama, even in the first election, but I just felt like he was flat out lying to people as though we were all ignorant of reality (which he was...because generally Americans were).

I'm all for liberals in the White House and conservatives in Congress. That said, I'm as anti-tea party as a person could be. Ultra-idealism on either side is bad for us all. The old saying often used regarding food applies to the political theater as well: "Everything in moderation."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 10:30:25 AM
I don't believe a businessperson should be in charge of the country. I firmly believe that someone who has big ideals and speaks well should be President.

That's absolutely ridiculous. That's basically the criteria my father votes for, and that's only because he grew up worshiping a dictator who spoke well and had big ideals. I'd like to think Americans are smarter than that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 06, 2013, 10:51:39 AM
That's absolutely ridiculous. That's basically the criteria my father votes for, and that's only because he grew up worshiping a dictator who spoke well and had big ideals. I'd like to think Americans are smarter than that.

I'm so sorry my political ideals don't match yours. It certainly must be because I'm an idiot. I'll just ask you who to spend my vote on from now on so I don't get it wrong.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 11:04:37 AM
I'm so sorry my political ideals don't match yours. It certainly must be because I'm an idiot. I'll just ask you who to spend my vote on from now on so I don't get it wrong.

That would be great. Thanks!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on November 06, 2013, 11:10:04 AM

I'm fine with tying the minimum wage to inflation, but it shouldn't just be arbitrarily increased because "it's not enough" or some other stupid reason.

There are bigger issues than minimum wage which have caused the ever-growing income gap in this country.  I just hate the fact that corporations have been enabled to the point that they're able to pay less than a livable wage and pass the burden onto the American public.  We've made it far too easy for them to pad their coffers at the expense of workers both here and abroad.  It's like we decided maturing as a nation in the Progressive era was wrongheaded.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 11:20:44 AM
There are bigger issues than minimum wage which have caused the ever-growing income gap in this country.  I just hate the fact that corporations have been enabled to the point that they're able to pay less than a livable wage and pass the burden onto the American public.  We've made it far too easy for them to pad their coffers at the expense of workers both here and abroad.  It's like we decided maturing as a nation in the Progressive era was wrongheaded.

There's a trade-off though. Look up the statistics for CPI and Minimum wage by country. It's no coincidence that the countries with the highest cost of living also pay the highest minimum wage. And CPI isn't arbitrary either, it's directly tied to the cost of labor. You'll have to pay $20 for a beer in Oslo because the bartender is required by law to earn around $50k per year, and his staff no less than $40k. Is that what we really want?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 06, 2013, 11:28:05 AM
There's a trade-off though. Look up the statistics for CPI and Minimum wage by country. It's no coincidence that the countries with the highest cost of living also pay the highest minimum wage. And CPI isn't arbitrary either, it's directly tied to the cost of labor. You'll have to pay $20 for a beer in Oslo because the bartender is required by law to earn around $50k per year, and his staff no less than $40k. Is that what we really want?

It's as if you didn't actually read what he wrote.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 11:30:25 AM
It's as if you didn't actually read what he wrote.

Do you think companies are just going to let their capital costs increase without doing something to offset it? Publicly traded companies especially aren't going to take a hit in profits just because the government says that they have to pay their employees more. Either they'll cut jobs or raise prices. Either way the burden goes right back to the public.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 06, 2013, 11:35:51 AM
Do you think companies are just going to let their capital costs increase without doing something to offset it? Publicly traded companies especially aren't going to take a hit in profits just because the government says that they have to pay their employees more. Either they'll cut jobs or raise prices. Either way the burden goes right back to the public.

I've already been over my answer. The heart of the issue is the economic disparity in America. There are people who "earn" far more than they'll ever spend, while the bottom tier feeds off the tax revenue of the middle.

I'm all in favor of taxing the wealthy and redistributing it. Tough luck kids. You had your chance to make "trickle down" work. You literally let it trickle, so now you pay the price.

I'm sure it'll be called communism, which it's not, but it's funny that it isn't called communism today when it's done to the middle class.

Class warfare was started by the rich, not the poor.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 11:43:46 AM
I've already been over my answer. The heart of the issue is the economic disparity in America. There are people who "earn" far more than they'll ever spend, while the bottom tier feeds off the tax revenue of the middle.

I'm all in favor of taxing the wealthy and redistributing it. Tough luck kids. You had your chance to make "trickle down" work. You literally let it trickle, so now you pay the price.

I'm sure it'll be called communism, which it's not, but it's funny that it isn't called communism today when it's done to the middle class.

Class warfare was started by the rich, not the poor.

But you don't seem to understand the issue with "redistribution".

What are you going to do? Increase the minimum wage? How does that help the Middle Class? Especially when the cost of goods and services would UNDOUBTEDLY increase. You've just taxed the wealthy, and threw that money into social programs.

It's way more complicated that simply taxing the rich. Where will the money go?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 06, 2013, 11:56:56 AM
But you don't seem to understand the issue with "redistribution".

What are you going to do? Increase the minimum wage? How does that help the Middle Class? Especially when the cost of goods and services would UNDOUBTEDLY increase. You've just taxed the wealthy, and threw that money into social programs.

It's way more complicated that simply taxing the rich. Where will the money go?

Artificial civic job creation. Return some manufacturing to this country. Put significantly more cash into the education system.

Use more of the rich's money to fund the social programs that you and I are already paying for.

If that raises the cost of goods because the rich raise prices, then they'll feel it again when their tax burden raises again. At some point every beaten dog learns to stop chewing on your shoes.*

The reality is, while you could argue that higher demand would raise cost for everyone it's simply bullshit. Poor people aren't going to buy new iPads. They're going to spend newly gained income on the rent they formerly couldn't pay, or upgrade their housing situation. Even if that means more housing has to be built, that creates jobs, it doesn't hurt the economy, it actually immediately recycles that cash.

As for food, we overproduce food in this country already. The US government destroys food that it purchases every year so that farmers don't have to undercut their own prices. If more people can afford to buy those goods, the government doesn't have to buy it, production remains steady, and more people get to actually, you know, eat.

There are answers to the questions. The wealthy (or those who aspire to be at any cost) aren't usually interested in them though.
 
None of this has anything to do with the minimum wage either.
 
 
 
 
* I do not condone beating dogs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 06, 2013, 11:59:08 AM
I'm amused that Tommy uses as an example the country with the fourth highest quality of life in the world (OECD figures, ranked behind Australia, Sweden and Canada in that order) and asks, "Really? Is that what we want?"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 06, 2013, 12:02:25 PM
Artificial civic job creation. Return some manufacturing to this country. Put significantly more cash into the education system.

Use more of the rich's money to fund the social programs that you and I are already paying for.

If that raises the cost of goods because the rich raise prices, then they'll feel it again when their tax burden raises again. At some point every beaten dog learns to stop chewing on your shoes.*

The reality is, while you could argue that higher demand would raise cost for everyone it's simply bullshit. Poor people aren't going to buy new iPads. They're going to spend newly gained income on the rent they formerly couldn't pay, or upgrade their housing situation. Even if that means more housing has to be built, that creates jobs, it doesn't hurt the economy, it actually immediately recycles that cash.

As for food, we overproduce food in this country already. The US government destroys food that it purchases every year so that farmers don't have to undercut their own prices. If more people can afford to buy those goods, the government doesn't have to buy it, production remains steady, and more people get to actually, you know, eat.

There are answers to the questions. The wealthy (or those who aspire to be at any cost) aren't usually interested in them though.
 
None of this has anything to do with the minimum wage either.
 
 
 
 
* I do not condone beating dogs.

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on November 06, 2013, 12:02:27 PM
I'm amused that Tommy uses as an example the country with the fourth highest quality of life in the world (OECD figures, ranked behind Australia, Sweden and Canada in that order) and asks, "Really? Is that what we want?"

Cheap beer is more important than access to health care for the poor, freaking commie.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 01:03:20 PM
I'm amused that Tommy uses as an example the country with the fourth highest quality of life in the world (OECD figures, ranked behind Australia, Sweden and Canada in that order) and asks, "Really? Is that what we want?"

Source?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 06, 2013, 01:26:45 PM
The OECD. Like I said. Does your Google not work?

http://www.businessinsider.com/top-countries-on-oecd-better-life-index-2013-5?op=1

http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/#/11111111111
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 06, 2013, 01:33:11 PM
I have personally known money managers that have left the US to move to Norway for the quality of life and to escape the pressure. FYI
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 01:52:33 PM
The OECD. Like I said. Does your Google not work?

http://www.businessinsider.com/top-countries-on-oecd-better-life-index-2013-5?op=1

http://www.oecdbetterlifeindex.org/#/11111111111

I wanted to know which list you were actually looking at, as I couldn't find anything specific. Mostly because I want to find out what specifically the OECD throws into their "Better Life" formula. In this particular case, it varies. You can essentially select what factors to use to make your very own Index.

There are a ton of these types of indexes that try and quantify "happiness" or "quality of life", and they're all bullshit. You're better than that. Hell, the EIU published one in 2005 that had Canada right below the U.S. In another one I saw IRELAND was #1.

Besides, the U.S is always in the Top 10 of these lists, even with the billions of people living below the poverty line, the quadrillions of children who are dying without access to healthcare, and the hundreds of billions who die each day because of all the environmental issues here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 01:56:11 PM
I have personally known money managers that have left the US to move to Norway for the quality of life and to escape the pressure. FYI

I've personally never heard of anyone moving to Norway for any reason. They tax you up the derriere out there.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 06, 2013, 01:58:05 PM
Tommy, you can move the sliders around and change the positions a bit. The fact - FACT - is that Norway (as with most of the other Scandinavian countries) has one of the highest standards of living of anywhere in the world based on pretty much any sensible criteria you care to use, and to try and make a point of "but it costs $20 for a beer, and is that the sort of country we really want?" with a straight face makes you look like an utter buffoon.

I've personally never heard of anyone moving to Norway for any reason. They tax you up the derriere out there.

OK, it's official. You're an idiot.

The accumulation of wealth for its own sake is utter foolishness. Standard of living is everything to anyone with a brain. How much money you give to the government is completely irrelevant to standard of living, and if you can't see that I don't know why you're in this conversation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 06, 2013, 02:05:19 PM
The countries on that liat are drastically smaller and different.  Comparing models for the usa to any of them is retarded.

I'm pretty certain that our population is bigger than the other 14 countries on that list combined

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 02:13:46 PM
Tommy, you can move the sliders around and change the positions a bit. The fact - FACT - is that Norway (as with most of the other Scandinavian countries) has one of the highest standards of living of anywhere in the world based on pretty much any sensible criteria you care to use, and to try and make a point of "but it costs $20 for a beer, and is that the sort of country we really want?" with a straight face makes you look like an utter buffoon.

Yeah, they have one of the highest standards of living... but so does the U.S and most other Western countries. The ranking depends on what criteria you want to use and when. Just because Norway shows up as #1 on some arbitrary list one year doesn't make their system the best. Besides, their country is 1/60th the size of the U.S. You can't even BEGIN to compare either country.

My point had nothing to do with any of these so-called quality of life statistics. The FACT is that the cost of living in Norway is much higher than the U.S. If the cost of living in the U.S were to all of a sudden rise 10pct, who do you think would be affected the most?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 06, 2013, 02:24:58 PM
Hang on a minute. You're the one who introduced Norway to the conversation and claimed that because bartenders have to be paid US$50K per annum it means that beer costs US$20 a pint, and "do we really want to live like that"? You compare Norway to the US, then when I point out why you're being stupid comparing Norway to the US, you accuse me of being stupid for comparing Norway to the US.

Have you considered a career with the Republican Party?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 06, 2013, 02:27:21 PM
Hang on a minute. You're the one who introduced Norway to the conversation and claimed that because bartenders have to be paid US$50K per annum it means that beer costs US$20 a pint, and "do we really want to live like that"? You compare Norway to the US, then when I point out why you're being stupid comparing Norway to the US, you accuse me of being stupid for comparing Norway to the US.

Have you considered a career with the Republican Party?

It's actually not entirely difficult to get on the Republican ballot for a citywide election in NYC, if he wanted. Though he'd probably want to pad the resume a little.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 02:32:39 PM
Hang on a minute. You're the one who introduced Norway to the conversation and claimed that because bartenders have to be paid US$50K per annum it means that beer costs US$20 a pint, and "do we really want to live like that"? You compare Norway to the US, then when I point out why you're being stupid comparing Norway to the US, you accuse me of being stupid for comparing Norway to the US.

Have you considered a career with the Republican Party?

My point was that there are tradeoffs in having labor wage minimums. Norway is a good example because in order for the country to afford those minimums, not only does the government have to tax 25% of all goods, companies have to mark prices up as well. If that's what happens in a country of 5 million, can you even imagine what the ramifications would be here in the United States?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 06, 2013, 02:35:14 PM
But according to you and DCM, "their country is 1/60th the size of the U.S. You can't even BEGIN to compare either country." Despite the fact that you are doing.

Either the same economic principles apply to both countries in which case you can make your point but mine also stands, or they don't and your original point is complete hooey. You choose.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 06, 2013, 02:38:05 PM
But according to you and DCM, "their country is 1/60th the size of the U.S. You can't even BEGIN to compare either country." Despite the fact that you are doing.

Either the same economic principles apply to both countries in which case you can make your point but mine also stands, or they don't and your original point is complete hooey. You choose.

To be fair he said we shouldn't do what they have.



Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 06, 2013, 02:41:26 PM
To be fair he said we shouldn't do what they have.



Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk



But you can't compare them, because they're so much smaller than the US therefore the same principles don't apply. Your view, not mine.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 02:42:30 PM
But you can't compare them, because they're so much smaller than the US therefore the same principles don't apply. Your view, not mine.

My quote:

Quote
It's no coincidence that the countries with the highest cost of living also pay the highest minimum wage.

High minimum wage = high cost of living.

I'm not talking about standard of living or whatever nonsense you want to talk about. Cost of living is very quantifiable.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 06, 2013, 02:43:13 PM
But you can't compare them, because they're so much smaller than the US therefore the same principles don't apply. Your view, not mine.

...  That was the point. They are so different that their model isn't viable here.



Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 06, 2013, 02:43:43 PM
maybe the thread title should change to "International Economics"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 06, 2013, 02:46:36 PM
My quote:

High minimum wage = high cost of living.

I'm not talking about standard of living or whatever nonsense you want to talk about. Cost of living is very quantifiable.

The fact that you think cost of living is more important than standard of living defines you perfectly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 02:47:31 PM
The fact that you think cost of living is more important than standard of living defines you perfectly.

Cost of living is quantifiable. Standard of living is not. Why can't you get that through your head? Standard of living is very subjective.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 06, 2013, 02:48:22 PM
Cost of living is quantifiable. Standard of living is not. Why can't you get that through your head? Standard of living is very subjective.

No it isn't.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2013, 02:50:01 PM
No it isn't.

It's really very simple.

Cost of living: the average cost of goods, services, rent, utilities, etc.

Standard of living: insert whatever statistic you want
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 06, 2013, 03:00:41 PM
It's really very simple.

Cost of living: the average cost of goods, services, rent, utilities, etc.

Standard of living: insert whatever statistic you want

OK, so now you've gone from "standard of living is subjective" to "standard of living has more than one way in which it can be objectively assessed". I agree with that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 06, 2013, 03:05:40 PM
OK, so now you've gone from "standard of living is subjective" to "standard of living has more than one way in which it can be objectively assessed". I agree with that.

Take it you don't know what objective means

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 06, 2013, 03:07:00 PM
Take it you don't know what objective means

Sent from my SM-N900V using Tapatalk



You make me want Hobbes back.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 06, 2013, 03:51:46 PM
I've personally never heard of anyone moving to Norway for any reason. They tax you up the derriere out there.

I don't quit think they gave a crap about taxes. One in particular ran billions of dollars and got tired of the rat race and was young enough to go wherever he wanted. He picked Norway. It's a beautiful country that treats it's people and guests well.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 06, 2013, 03:52:10 PM
You make me want Hobbes back.

GFY
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 10, 2013, 11:40:07 AM
http://www.khou.com/news/local/White-guy-wins-after-leading-voters-to-believe-hes-black-231222981.html

Quote
HOUSTON -- Dave Wilson chuckles as he talks about his unorthodox political campaign.

"I'd always said it was a long shot," Wilson says. "No, I didn't expect to win."

Still, he figured he'd have fun running, because he was fed up with what he called "all the shenanigans" at the Houston Community College System. As a conservative white Republican running in a district whose voters are overwhelmingly black Democrats, the odds seemed overwhelmingly against him.

Then he came up with an idea, an advertising strategy that his opponent found "disgusting." If a white guy didn't have a chance in a mostly African-American district, Wilson would lead voters to think he's black.

And it apparently worked. In one of the biggest political upsets in Houston politics this election season, Wilson -- an anti-gay activist and former fringe candidate for mayor -- emerged as the surprise winner over 24-year incumbent Bruce Austin. His razor thin margin of victory, only 26 votes, was almost certainly influenced by his racially tinged campaign.

"Every time a politician talks, he's out there deceiving voters," he says.

Wilson, a gleeful political troublemaker, printed direct mail pieces strongly implying that he's black. His fliers were decorated with photographs of smiling African-American faces -- which he readily admits he just lifted off websites -- and captioned with the words "Please vote for our friend and neighbor Dave Wilson."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 10, 2013, 12:02:24 PM
That man deserves a medal
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 13, 2013, 07:15:06 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/12/budget-congress_n_4435761.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009

Fingers crossed that this is a start on the way back towards sensible two party politics and the Koch-funded lunatics can go back to being noisy and irrelevant on the fringes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 13, 2013, 07:23:06 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/12/12/budget-congress_n_4435761.html?ncid=edlinkusaolp00000009

Fingers crossed that this is a start on the way back towards sensible two party politics and the Koch-funded lunatics can go back to being noisy and irrelevant on the fringes.

Not a chance

We wont move towards sensible politics till the extremist on the left and right are out of power. Names like Obama Reid Pelosi on the left all HAVE to go (defend Obama as you want, the guy is incredibly incredibly polar inciting significant class warfare, not to mention his rise to power was all about the Bash Bush politics pushing us towards the left). And the right needs to abandon Palin and Tea Party extremists, as well as become sensible when it comes to things like Abortion and Gay Rights.

Maybe after Obamas out both parties might move to the center as things to remain competitive in the elections, but I wouldnt expect anything reasonable until the next presidency (whether its a dem or republican)  at the absolute earliest
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 13, 2013, 10:08:52 PM
Not a chance

We wont move towards sensible politics till the extremist on the left and right are out of power. Names like Obama Reid Pelosi on the left all HAVE to go (defend Obama as you want, the guy is incredibly incredibly polar inciting significant class warfare, not to mention his rise to power was all about the Bash Bush politics pushing us towards the left). And the right needs to abandon Palin and Tea Party extremists, as well as become sensible when it comes to things like Abortion and Gay Rights.

Maybe after Obamas out both parties might move to the center as things to remain competitive in the elections, but I wouldnt expect anything reasonable until the next presidency (whether its a dem or republican)  at the absolute earliest

Nonsense. It's the right's fault 100pct of the time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2013, 12:28:25 PM
Not a chance

We wont move towards sensible politics till the extremist on the left and right are out of power. Names like Obama Reid Pelosi on the left all HAVE to go (defend Obama as you want, the guy is incredibly incredibly polar inciting significant class warfare, not to mention his rise to power was all about the Bash Bush politics pushing us towards the left). And the right needs to abandon Palin and Tea Party extremists, as well as become sensible when it comes to things like Abortion and Gay Rights.

Maybe after Obamas out both parties might move to the center as things to remain competitive in the elections, but I wouldnt expect anything reasonable until the next presidency (whether its a dem or republican)  at the absolute earliest

The only thing polarizing about Obama is the color of his skin.  A republican couldn't ask for a more moderate democratic president.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2013, 12:29:38 PM
Nonsense. It's the right's fault 100pct of the time.

Since January of 2009 this is the case.  It's sad but it's entirely true.  Feel free to share some examples where it is not.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 14, 2013, 01:13:20 PM
The only thing polarizing about Obama is the color of his skin.  A republican couldn't ask for a more moderate democratic president.

Lol what

The guy has every Unions dick inside him, and his entire political strategy was bash bush. The guy is am ardent defender of financial redistribution, there is NOTHING  moderate about this man.

His greatest accomplishments have been entirely one sided In congressional/Senate support, and his approval ratings are lower than bush.

He's not even close to being as moderate as Bill Clinton was. If anything he's as moderate as Jimmy Carter

Find me a single political article written in the last 2-3 years that describes him as a moderate Democrat.

They don't exist, you're ridiculous
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 14, 2013, 02:02:12 PM
The only thing polarizing about Obama is the color of his skin.  A republican couldn't ask for a more moderate democratic president.

Lol don't you know that accusing people that don't like BO of racism is soooo 2009?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2013, 02:45:23 PM
Lol what

The guy has every Unions dick inside him, and his entire political strategy was bash bush. The guy is am ardent defender of financial redistribution, there is NOTHING  moderate about this man.

His greatest accomplishments have been entirely one sided In congressional/Senate support, and his approval ratings are lower than bush.

He's not even close to being as moderate as Bill Clinton was. If anything he's as moderate as Jimmy Carter

Find me a single political article written in the last 2-3 years that describes him as a moderate Democrat.

They don't exist, you're ridiculous

Did he get re-elected because of Bush?  Don't be a freaking moron.

Both parties believe in financial redistribution...  Dems favor people, Reps favor companies.  I would rather my tax dollars help the guy down the street than a billion dollar company or a foreign war.

As I asked, what has he signed into law that hasn't been moderate?  Provide an example or just stop trying.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2013, 02:46:19 PM
Lol don't you know that accusing people that don't like BO of racism is soooo 2009?



But Rosa Parks ended racism in the 60's, right?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 14, 2013, 02:46:24 PM
Did he get re-elected because of Bush?  Don't be a freaking moron.

Yeah, pretty much.

2008: McCain = Bush!

2012: Romney = still Bush!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2013, 02:49:39 PM
Yeah, pretty much.

2008: McCain = Bush!

2012: Romney = Bush!

McCain had become Bush in 2008.  Senile old bastard lost his mind in that election.

I don't recall much if any comparisons between Romney and Bush.

Though you are probably just freaking with me and I missed your sarcasm.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 14, 2013, 02:54:41 PM
Did he get re-elected because of Bush?  Don't be a freaking moron.

Both parties believe in financial redistribution...  Dems favor people, Reps favor companies.  I would rather my tax dollars help the guy down the street than a billion dollar company or a foreign war.

As I asked, what has he signed into law that hasn't been moderate?  Provide an example or just stop trying.

Uhm how about Obamacare which he rammed through without republican support?

Big Govt involvement in your healthcare isn't moderate at all whatsoever.


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 14, 2013, 02:59:20 PM
McCain had become Bush in 2008.  Senile old bastard lost his mind in that election.

I don't recall much if any comparisons between Romney and Bush.

Though you are probably just freaking with me and I missed your sarcasm.

Seriously?

Obamas entire campaign was "Romney = Bush"

Didn't Obama say several times that Romney was running for bushes third term or something like that during the debates?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2013, 02:59:34 PM
Uhm how about Obamacare which he rammed through without republican support?

Big Govt involvement in your healthcare isn't moderate at all whatsoever.




Unless you are a republican governor from Massachusetts?  Try again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 14, 2013, 03:00:03 PM
Big Govt involvement in your healthcare isn't moderate at all whatsoever.

Do you ever stop to think about what you're writing, or do you just let the words flow wherever they may take you?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 14, 2013, 03:00:34 PM
Unless you are a republican governor from Massachusetts?  Try again.

Arguing with you is a complete waste of time if you think Obamacare is moderate
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2013, 03:02:18 PM
Seriously?

Obamas entire campaign was "Romney = Bush"

Didn't Obama say several times that Romney was running for bushes third term or something like that during the debates?

His entire campaign?  Really?  I recall similar sentiments regarding McCain in 2008, but Romney was a hoo-ha that allowed the Tea Party to ruin his chances in 2012.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 14, 2013, 03:02:33 PM
Do you ever stop to think about what you're writing, or do you just let the words flow wherever they may take you?

You think Obamacare is moderate, taxing/penalizing people who don't have healthcare and increased regulations?

I'm not arguing whether it's good or bad, but theres no sane person on the freaking planet who thinks it's a moderate bill
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 14, 2013, 03:03:26 PM
At this point I find it hard to imagine any incumbent president not being reelected without some sort of big scandal in their first term.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2013, 03:05:53 PM
Arguing with you is a complete waste of time if you think Obamacare is moderate

What's NOT moderate about it.  I wanted single payer.  Obama wanted single payer.  He made a compromise to ensure that people would be covered one way or the other.  If you don't see how it's going to save this country billions in the long term...  You need to go back to school.

The only waste of time is YOU talking politics.

Fox News is a hell of a drug.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2013, 03:08:45 PM
At this point I find it hard to imagine any incumbent president not being reelected without some sort of big scandal in their first term.

Dems couldn't get a decent challenger in 2004 and Reps couldn't get a decent challenger in 2012.  I think it has alot more to do with folks not wanting to challenge an incumbent.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 14, 2013, 03:10:48 PM
You think Obamacare is moderate, taxing/penalizing people who don't have healthcare and increased regulations?

I'm not arguing whether it's good or bad, but theres no sane person on the freaking planet who thinks it's a moderate bill

I wasn't talking about Obamacare, I was referring to your specific statement that "Big Govt involvement in your healthcare isn't moderate at all whatsoever." Moderate and indeed right wing governments all around the world are far more involved in healthcare than the US government, as they should be. Healthcare is a basic human right.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 14, 2013, 03:11:29 PM
Dems couldn't get a decent challenger in 2004 and Reps couldn't get a decent challenger in 2012.  I think it has alot more to do with folks not wanting to challenge an incumbent.

I just meant that the political/media landscape of today, as opposed to 20 years ago, is the reason why incumbents have it easy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 14, 2013, 03:13:23 PM
I just meant that the political/media landscape of today, as opposed to 20 years ago, is the reason why incumbents have it easy.

I think your point is essentially correct in all political systems; it's less relevant in the US with its term limits, but there's a political maxim that oppositions don't win elections, incumbents lose them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 14, 2013, 03:16:32 PM
What's NOT moderate about it.  I wanted single payer.  Obama wanted single payer.  He made a compromise to ensure that people would be covered one way or the other.  If you don't see how it's going to save this country billions in the long term...  You need to go back to school.

The only waste of time is YOU talking politics.

Fox News is a hell of a drug.

Yeah im the stupid one.

5 minutes after saying "The right should be happy, Obama is as moderate of a democrat as you can ask for"

"Obama wanted a single payer system"

A single payer system is moderate?

REALLY ?!

REALLY REALLY !?!?

And this isnt going to save the country billions, you clearly havent been following well anything in regards to Obamacare. its an incredibly incredibly inefficient system. Its basically a bad hybrid system that bogs up private healthcare with increased regulations drastically driving up the prices (which it has). And the only reason its supposed to "work" is because it almost forces young people to subsidize healthcare for older individuals.

I personally believe they implemented such an inefficient system as a preface to a single payer system, because eventually people are going to say wow look at how much money were wasting, lets just switch to single payer. And it ultimately might work.

And a single payer system would be DRASTICALLY more efficient/cheaper than the current Obamacare garbage which we have.

I am NOT an advocate for a single payer system, but rather I am simply saying it would be much much much more cost effective than the current excrement which just got implemented.

Either way the point is no sane freaking person thinks Obama is moderate, NONE. Youre just such an Obama groupie that you cant seem to  acknowledge that.

And throwing fox news in there, cute.  Except I dont like the right, I think theyre freaking retarded as well. Im all about who is going to grow the economy the most, while keeping taxes and spending the lowest. All the other excrement is irrelevant garbage to me.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 14, 2013, 03:20:41 PM
I wasn't talking about Obamacare, I was referring to your specific statement that "Big Govt involvement in your healthcare isn't moderate at all whatsoever." Moderate and indeed right wing governments all around the world are far more involved in healthcare than the US government, as they should be. Healthcare is a basic human right.

I have no interest in getting into the healthcare is a basic human right argument because its too muddled (ie factoring in people who smoke, are morbidly obese, live off fast food etc)

But forcing people to buy it, making young people pay multi thousand dollar fines if they dont ? Giving out birthcontrol, or forcing people to pay for someone elses abortions (again dont care if youre pro life or pro choice, I think this is something people should pay for on their own, not dump on the tax payer)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2013, 04:06:44 PM
Yeah im the stupid one.

5 minutes after saying "The right should be happy, Obama is as moderate of a democrat as you can ask for"

"Obama wanted a single payer system"

A single payer system is moderate?

REALLY ?!

REALLY REALLY !?!?

And this isnt going to save the country billions, you clearly havent been following well anything in regards to Obamacare. its an incredibly incredibly inefficient system. Its basically a bad hybrid system that bogs up private healthcare with increased regulations drastically driving up the prices (which it has). And the only reason its supposed to "work" is because it almost forces young people to subsidize healthcare for older individuals.

I personally believe they implemented such an inefficient system as a preface to a single payer system, because eventually people are going to say wow look at how much money were wasting, lets just switch to single payer. And it ultimately might work.

And a single payer system would be DRASTICALLY more efficient/cheaper than the current Obamacare garbage which we have.

I am NOT an advocate for a single payer system, but rather I am simply saying it would be much much much more cost effective than the current excrement which just got implemented.

Either way the point is no sane freaking person thinks Obama is moderate, NONE. Youre just such an Obama groupie that you cant seem to  acknowledge that.

And throwing fox news in there, cute.  Except I dont like the right, I think theyre freaking retarded as well. Im all about who is going to grow the economy the most, while keeping taxes and spending the lowest. All the other excrement is irrelevant garbage to me.



You may not 'like' the right, but you sure talk like that's all you listen to.

The affordable care act is not about the economy.  It is about ensuring that our populace has health care.  By creating the marketplaces they are forcing insurance companies to fight for subscribers.  You know, free market and all that excrement.

It also forces said insurance companies to cover stuff that they didn't in the past.  Now the billion dollar companies have to cover the expenses of serious illness, rather than just dropping people and pushing the cost to the tax payers.

You talk about minutia like abortions and birth control.  Do you see why people think you are a right wing nut job?

How much does an abortion cost compared to an uninsured guy showing up to the emergency room with a brain tumor?  How much does birth control cost compared to a child being a ward of the state, or an uninsured woman shoving a hanger up her lady garden and piercing her uterus?

A very, very small minority of people on excrement health care plans will see their rates go up.  Do some research before you spout this tripe.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 14, 2013, 04:25:49 PM
You may not 'like' the right, but you sure talk like that's all you listen to.

The affordable care act is not about the economy.  It is about ensuring that our populace has health care.  By creating the marketplaces they are forcing insurance companies to fight for subscribers.  You know, free market and all that excrement.

It also forces said insurance companies to cover stuff that they didn't in the past.  Now the billion dollar companies have to cover the expenses of serious illness, rather than just dropping people and pushing the cost to the tax payers.

You talk about minutia like abortions and birth control.  Do you see why people think you are a right wing nut job?

How much does an abortion cost compared to an uninsured guy showing up to the emergency room with a brain tumor?  How much does birth control cost compared to a child being a ward of the state, or an uninsured woman shoving a hanger up her lady garden and piercing her uterus?

A very, very small minority of people on excrement health care plans will see their rates go up.  Do some research before you spout this tripe.

yeah it "forces" them to cover things they didnt in the past. Guess what happens now that theyre forced to cover them, they increase their rates. 

Im not against abortions and birth control, I think they are necessary parts of our society and culture. What I am against is me having to pay for someones and call it "healthcare"

Oh yeah I choose to run around and freak a bunch of dudes so I need "healthcare" to make sure I dont get knocked up.

You know how effective a condom is when used properly ? 99.99%. Condoms are available for FREE all over the place or dirt cheap elsewhere, and prevent STDS (which are all over the place).

So dont give me this excrement that oh yeah yeah free birth control and abortions are a necessary part of healthcare. Use a freaking condom, or pay for your own abortions and birth control. 

How much does an abortion + antibiotics to treat that STD cost compared to a condom ?

And the "very very small minority" will see their rates go up is bullshit.

I work part time on the side for a medical coding and billing company. Health care prices going up is quite common.

Just like people who "could keep their plans if they wanted it" even though millions of people got dropped.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 14, 2013, 04:30:40 PM
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/11/04/49-state-analysis-obamacare-to-increase-individual-market-premiums-by-avg-of-41-subsidies-flow-to-elderly/

Quote
Today, the Manhattan Institute released the most comprehensive analysis yet conducted of premiums under Obamacare for people who shop for coverage on their own. Here’s what we learned. In the average state, Obamacare will increase underlying premiums by 41 percent. As we have long expected, the steepest hikes will be imposed on the healthy, the young, and the male. And Obamacare’s taxpayer-funded subsidies will primarily benefit those nearing retirement—people who, unlike the young, have had their whole lives to save for their health-care needs.


http://www.cnbc.com/id/101158964
Quote
"(F)ederally mandated health care changes will require Comcast-NBCUniversal to pay new fees and implement plan design changes that will contribute to the increased cost of our plans," says the open enrollment guide for CNBC.com's parent company, where employee health care premiums are rising by double digits, and deductibles in some cases are doubling.

Guess I need to do some research though.

Whered you do yours? Obama promised you that theyll go down, so you just took his word for it right?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2013, 04:42:12 PM
yeah it "forces" them to cover things they didnt in the past. Guess what happens now that theyre forced to cover them, they increase their rates. 

Im not against abortions and birth control, I think they are necessary parts of our society and culture. What I am against is me having to pay for someones and call it "healthcare"

Oh yeah I choose to run around and freak a bunch of dudes so I need "healthcare" to make sure I dont get knocked up.

You know how effective a condom is when used properly ? 99.99%. Condoms are available for FREE all over the place or dirt cheap elsewhere, and prevent STDS (which are all over the place).

So dont give me this excrement that oh yeah yeah free birth control and abortions are a necessary part of healthcare. Use a freaking condom, or pay for your own abortions and birth control. 

How much does an abortion + antibiotics to treat that STD cost compared to a condom ?

And the "very very small minority" will see their rates go up is bullshit.

I work part time on the side for a medical coding and billing company. Health care prices going up is quite common.

Just like people who "could keep their plans if they wanted it" even though millions of people got dropped.


You babble like that and still missed the ENTIRE point of my post.

You are arguing about bullshit like birth control and abortions.  I will agree, just use a freaking condom, but why shouldn't they be free as well?  Unplanned births cost the taxpayers far more than the birth control that could have avoided them.  This is a simple concept.  Simple.  Get it?

And you say you're not a right wing nut job?

Quote
Oh yeah I choose to run around and freak a bunch of dudes so I need "healthcare" to make sure I dont get knocked up.

(http://images.rcp.realclearpolitics.com/97289_5_.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 14, 2013, 04:43:46 PM
What's NOT moderate about it. I wanted single payer.  Obama wanted single payer. He made a compromise to ensure that people would be covered one way or the other.  If you don't see how it's going to save this country billions in the long term...  You need to go back to school.

The only waste of time is YOU talking politics.

Fox News is a hell of a drug.

Do you know what single payer would do to the standard of care we receive in this country? Obama was forced to reject single-payer because the very idea is so fundamentally rooted against capitalism, that people would've been even more pissed then they are now over your "moderate" plan. The ACA according to polls is wildly unpopular. Why the hell would this country want to embrace a single payer program?

Anyone with half a brain that is deciding to either go into healthcare or technology would run far the hell away from becoming a doctor unless they want to get saddled with debt from medical school payments and 6-figure malpractice insurance.

Lol at the notion that the ACA is moderate because single-payer was actually an option.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2013, 04:44:56 PM
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2013/11/04/49-state-analysis-obamacare-to-increase-individual-market-premiums-by-avg-of-41-subsidies-flow-to-elderly/


http://www.cnbc.com/id/101158964
Guess I need to do some research though.

Whered you do yours? Obama promised you that theyll go down, so you just took his word for it right?

Premiums HAVE gone down.  The folks in those studies will get subsidies (you know, tax breaks) on their premiums.  They will also have health care plans that don't bankrupt them if they do get sick.  And I know you are obviously not a budding economist, but who do you think pays now when someone goes bankrupt because they get sick?

Simple question for a simple person.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 14, 2013, 04:45:51 PM
I'm not really interested in getting involved in this argument, largely because I don't have the knowledge to do so, but I'd just like to put my thanks to dcm on record for the new signature.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2013, 04:49:29 PM
Do you know what single payer would do to the standard of care we receive in this country? Obama was forced to reject single-payer because the very idea is so fundamentally rooted against capitalism, that people would've been even more pissed then they are now over your "moderate" plan. The ACA according to polls is wildly unpopular. Why the hell would this country want to embrace a single payer program?

Anyone with half a brain that is deciding to either go into healthcare or technology would run far the hell away from becoming a doctor unless they want to get saddled with debt from medical school payments and 6-figure malpractice insurance.

Lol at the notion that the ACA is moderate because single-payer was actually an option.

Bad argument.  Unless you are going to try and tell me that doctors in Europe are living in cardboard boxes and/or that we don't have some of the lowest scores in health care in civilized countries.

I would have supported (and still would support) college loan breaks for people that go into public service.  Obama himself has argued for this over and over.

Again, I ask anyone to tell me how ACA is not moderate.  Insurance companies still keep getting richer, so what's the problem?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 14, 2013, 04:53:39 PM
Premiums HAVE gone down.  The folks in those studies will get subsidies (you know, tax breaks) on their premiums.  They will also have health care plans that don't bankrupt them if they do get sick.  And I know you are obviously not a budding economist, but who do you think pays now when someone goes bankrupt because they get sick?

Simple question for a simple person.

A subsidie paying for part of your premium =/= premiums going down. It means the government is paying part of your healthcare premium.

And the overwhelming majority of americans are NOT eligible for these subsidies, therefore their rates are going up.

 And yes tax payers pay when someone gets sick, taxpayers also pay for the subsides, and the ACA, and a billion other things.

None of this changes the fact that premiums went UP not down under Obamacare.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 14, 2013, 04:55:31 PM
Bad argument.  Unless you are going to try and tell me that doctors in Europe are living in cardboard boxes and/or that we don't have some of the lowest scores in health care in civilized countries.

I would have supported (and still would support) college loan breaks for people that go into public service.  Obama himself has argued for this over and over.

Again, I ask anyone to tell me how ACA is not moderate.  Insurance companies still keep getting richer, so what's the problem?

The ACA is just as moderate as Sarah Palin.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 14, 2013, 04:59:05 PM
You know how to reduce the premiums for everyone, don't you? Nationalise health insurance and take the profit centres out of it.

You want lower healthcare costs, that's the way to do it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 14, 2013, 05:14:07 PM
You know how to reduce the premiums for everyone, don't you? Nationalise health insurance and take the profit centres out of it.

You want lower healthcare costs, that's the way to do it.

I said that earlier, that a nationalized (socialized) system would be better/more cost efficient than our current system (by current system I mean the ACA garbage, not whatever you want to call what we had prior)

I dont think its the right way to go because it hurts the quality of care, increases wait times (sometimes drastically), requires your citizens to not be lazy disgusting fuckings who dont give a excrement about their health and to involve themselves in preventative care. But it would be better than the system under the ACA which is really the worst of both worlds.

Either we improve the OLD system (ie a capitalistic model) or move to the left in a nationalized mode. The ACA is a horrendous inefficient hybrid model and is just plain old wasteful and jacking up the prices while not doing much to improve it.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 14, 2013, 05:19:10 PM
I didn't say anything about nationalising healthcare (although that point could be argued as well), I said you nationalise the insurance.

Anyway, it's Saturday night. Joyous though I find these conversations, I'm going out for fancy food and expensive wine.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 14, 2013, 08:23:40 PM
I'm not really interested in getting involved in this argument, largely because I don't have the knowledge to do so, but I'd just like to put my thanks to dcm on record for the new signature.
hahahafuckingha. never change that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on December 14, 2013, 10:03:47 PM
Yeah im the stupid one.

I don't even know why I read anything past this sentence, it sums up most of the entire thread so adequately.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 16, 2013, 12:50:54 AM
I don't even know why I read anything past this sentence, it sums up most of the entire thread so adequately.

After JE jumped on the other quote, I almost took this one.  Priceless.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on January 04, 2014, 12:49:11 AM
This is sort of politically related..

Deadspin did a little piece on "things that should die(i.e. need to go away) in 2014". Tom Ley, who is one of their funnier writers, posted that Trick Shot Titus(I had to google it) should go away because his dad touts him around like honeyboo with a jumpshot . The kid is 2 years old.  Well, the dad apparently is a right wing nut radio show host in freaking Missouri or some excrement and they got into a bit of a twitter spat. 

Tom Ley made him look stupid(by retweeting a lot of his bigoted/jesusy old tweets consecutively) and I never heard of the other guy, so I responded to one of their interactions and asked if he got the show parading around his kid like a prize show dog. The guy responded and then all of a sudden I get this flurry of "YOU LIBERAL RETARD!" like tweets from packs of right wing psychopaths that follow him.  Which is pretty hilarious considering they managed to make that assumption from a single tweet, and the fact i've never actually voted democrat in my life.

Keep in mind this guy only has like 500 followers...I've had retweets and back and forth debates with major sports writers/personalities, rappers, even spike lee and my twitter never blew up like this.

Anyways, these people are freaking TERRIFYING...It's not like I've ever lived in an area where i've had to interact with them on any real basis and I've never actually paid attention to these people or the Rush Limbaugh/Glen Beck's of the world. But when you actually are reminded these people exist  and are not just some hilarious caricatures,the world becomes a frightening place. Even the libiest of libs could never be remotely this scary
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on January 04, 2014, 12:58:48 AM
oh, apparently my tweet to him along with other deadspin reader went up on something called Twitchy..which is run also run by a bunch of right wing nutbags judging by their staff.  Which is why i got all the responses

 http://twitchy.com/about/

I have no idea who Michelle Malkin is, but i guess she's kind of famous and that's her site. Funny thing is it claims to be a twitter aggregator but it's actually is a political vehicle.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 04, 2014, 04:37:10 AM
No idea what that is, but I know Malkin used to always end up on like OReilly and stuff back in the day.

She's pretty hot from what I remember, but she also is in the same category as like Ann Coulter and stuff so yeah
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 04, 2014, 04:42:25 AM
oh, apparently my tweet to him along with other deadspin reader went up on something called Twitchy..which is run also run by a bunch of right wing nutbags judging by their staff.  Which is why i got all the responses

 http://twitchy.com/about/

I have no idea who Michelle Malkin is, but i guess she's kind of famous and that's her site. Funny thing is it claims to be a twitter aggregator but it's actually is a political vehicle.


The site just highlights a lot of the hypocrisy amongst self-righteous liberals. There are similar ones targeting the Right, but most of the targets are the weird Christian conservatives.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 04, 2014, 05:51:47 AM
Btw this law sucks: U.S. Foreign Account Tax Compliance Act http://money.cnn.com/2013/09/15/news/banks-americans-lockout/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 04, 2014, 03:31:10 PM
The site just highlights a lot of the hypocrisy amongst self-righteous liberals. There are similar ones targeting the Right, but most of the targets are the weird Christian conservatives.

Self-righteous liberals?

I don't even know where to start man.  That's like a beige pot calling the other pot black.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on January 04, 2014, 05:15:14 PM
The site just highlights a lot of the hypocrisy amongst self-righteous liberals. There are similar ones targeting the Right, but most of the targets are the weird Christian conservatives.

Uh...

They took a joking deadspin article and turned into "DEADSPIN HATES BABIES".

You're too smart to be this dumb
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on January 04, 2014, 05:19:21 PM
No idea what that is, but I know Malkin used to always end up on like OReilly and stuff back in the day.

She's pretty hot from what I remember, but she also is in the same category as like Ann Coulter and stuff so yeah

Apparently she proudly calls herself the Asian Uncle Tom.

She wrote a book defending Japanese internment and said we should do the same to middle easterners.

Sounds like a woman who desperately wanted to be white growing up so she's overcompensating now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 04, 2014, 05:27:42 PM
Uh...

They took a joking deadspin article and turned into "DEADSPIN HATES BABIES".

You're too smart to be this dumb

Okay, I usually ignore all the crazy stuff. I'll admit that I didn't read any of your posts and only saw you mention Twichy.

Anyway, I used to follow and read Malkin during the Bush years when being conservative meant schooling liberals complaining ad naseum about every little thing Bush did. Now it's the people like Malkin who have decided to go batshit crazy and complain about every little thing.

The last 3 terms I went from a left leaning republican to a far right war hawk, and settled on a more libertarian ideology. I may end up giving up following politics altogether because it's just a bunch of emotional seasawing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 10, 2014, 01:04:15 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-administration-to-end-contract-with-cgi-federal-company-behind-healthcaregov/2014/01/10/001eb05a-719e-11e3-8b3f-b1666705ca3b_story.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 10, 2014, 03:50:24 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/obama-administration-to-end-contract-with-cgi-federal-company-behind-healthcaregov/2014/01/10/001eb05a-719e-11e3-8b3f-b1666705ca3b_story.html

What a shame.

It was nice having the healthcare of an entire country being handled by Michelle Obamas college friend on a no bid contract.

Because whats America without cronyism
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 10, 2014, 04:59:58 PM
What a shame.

It was nice having the healthcare of an entire country being handled by Michelle Obamas college friend on a no bid contract.

Because whats America without cronyism

CGI was approved to be one of the only IT firms in the nation to be allowed to work on Government healthcare IT in 2007, before Obama and before that woman who knows Michelle worked there. Out of that limited group, four of the companies went on to submit bids for the contract that would end up as Obamacare, and they submitted the most "cost-effective" plan. Do you just mindlessly suck at the right-wing hysteria bullshit nozzle 24/7?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 10, 2014, 06:01:09 PM
CGI was approved to be one of the only IT firms in the nation to be allowed to work on Government healthcare IT in 2007, before Obama and before that woman who knows Michelle worked there. Out of that limited group, four of the companies went on to submit bids for the contract that would end up as Obamacare, and they submitted the most "cost-effective" plan. Do you just mindlessly suck at the right-wing hysteria bullshit nozzle 24/7?

I think the right sucks balls too.

That said I dont know that washington post is a "right wing hysteria bullshit nozzle" (maybe they are ?)

But http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/10/16/meet-cgi-federal-the-company-behind-the-botched-launch-of-healthcare-gov/

Apparently their were 16 bids though, and we decided to go with a Canadian company (so much for those American Jobs eh?)

who was
Quote
"CGI Federal is a relative newbie on the U.S. government IT contracting scene."

And
Quote
Its performance on Ontario, Canada's health-care medical registry for diabetes sufferers was so poor that officials ditched the $46.2 million contract after three years of missed deadlines, the Washington Examiner reported.

But I guess its ok because you have Obamas nut in your mouth, that just because YES WE CAN

That everything he does is great, even if its a massive epic failure

Its cool though because it all worked so well
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 10, 2014, 06:23:34 PM
Apparently their were 16 bids though, and we decided to go with a Canadian company (so much for those American Jobs eh?)

You've heard of a little document called NAFTA, I presume? Notwithstanding the fact that CGI employ tens of thousands of people in the US, trust me when I say with first hand knowledge (because it's what I do for a living) that the US and particularly the US tech sector does much, much better out of the agreement than Canadian companies do.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 10, 2014, 06:52:25 PM
You've heard of a little document called NAFTA, I presume? Notwithstanding the fact that CGI employ tens of thousands of people in the US, trust me when I say with first hand knowledge (because it's what I do for a living) that the US and particularly the US tech sector does much, much better out of the agreement than Canadian companies do.

I never said it was illegal.

I said instead of spending BILLIONS of dollars in the American Economy, creating tens of thousands of American jobs. We decided to give Canada BILLIONS of dollars for their economy, while wasting billions of American dollars on a broken website.

And ill take your word for it that NAFTA does more for America than it does for Canada. But im not talking about NAFTA
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 10, 2014, 08:50:03 PM
Apparently their were 16 bids though, and we decided to go with a Canadian company (so much for those American Jobs eh?)

Do you even know how to read? THere are sixteen IT firms who are allowed to bid for these types of contracts, and CGI successfully bid to become one of those in 2007. Of those sixteen, four submitted bids for this particular contract, and CGI was awarded it.

I did not anywhere in anything I wrote today say anything complimentary about CGI or Obamacare- that's all your delusional parania and complete lack of ability to comprehend basic sentences.

Your no-bid contract claim was demonstrably proven false by the Post, and the claim they 'won' a single bid obamacare contract because someone who graduated in Michelle Obama's undergraduate class became one of the VPs is delusional right wing rhetoric, regardless of what you say your political orientation is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 10, 2014, 09:42:40 PM
Do you even know how to read? THere are sixteen IT firms who are allowed to bid for these types of contracts, and CGI successfully bid to become one of those in 2007. Of those sixteen, four submitted bids for this particular contract, and CGI was awarded it.

I did not anywhere in anything I wrote today say anything complimentary about CGI or Obamacare- that's all your delusional parania and complete lack of ability to comprehend basic sentences.

Your no-bid contract claim was demonstrably proven false by the Post, and the claim they 'won' a single bid obamacare contract because someone who graduated in Michelle Obama's undergraduate class became one of the VPs is delusional right wing rhetoric, regardless of what you say your political orientation is.

The post said
Quote
The Department of Health and Human Services reviewed only CGI’s bid for the Obamacare account

Quote
The House Committee on Energy and Commerce that four companies submitted bids, but did not name those companies or explain why only CGI’s bid was considered.

If that doesnt come off as a little funky to you, well then Pucks got a bridge to sell you.

Also apparently the Obasmas and her friend at CGI spent christmas together in 2010 (as well as posted pictures of it on facebook which are readily available on the internet)

So one would deduce that theyre probably more than just people who walked by each other in the halls

Im not really interested in conspiracy theories or any of that bullshit. But I dont think it takes a wild imagination to think that its not a coincidence that a college friend of hers, who spent christmas with them, and is VP of a major company, was the only company whose bid was reviewed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 10, 2014, 09:49:27 PM
The government bidding process is pretty dumb and inefficient anyway. Having sold to U.S government institutions it drove me absolutely crazy that they were legally bound to contact more than one provider when making a decision, and usually go with the cheaper option. That's probably what happened here. Of course when it comes to a national healthcare initiative like this, not hiring Accenture in the first place was a huge gamble. I guess the administration wanted to keep costs as low as possible and CGI promised them the world.

Though I don't agree with Obamacare, they really shouldn't be nickel and diming.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 10, 2014, 10:03:35 PM
Also apparently the Obasmas and her friend at CGI spent christmas together in 2010 (as well as posted pictures of it on facebook which are readily available on the internet)

Thanks Obasma.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 10, 2014, 10:09:17 PM
Thanks Obasma.

Well hes a secret Muslim, so I subliminally combined Obama and Osama

And before some crazy tree hugger goes crazy, im not being serious.

 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 10, 2014, 10:11:31 PM
Thanks Obasma.

What I find funny about the "Thanks Obama" joke is that it's just that, a joke. During the Bush years people had no issue with blaming Bush for every little thing no matter how ridiculous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 10, 2014, 10:14:33 PM
Well hes a secret Muslim, so I subliminally combined Obama and Osama

And before some crazy tree hugger goes crazy, im not being serious.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J47wTvlCoyo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 11, 2014, 01:58:12 AM
But I dont think it takes a wild imagination to think that its not a coincidence that a college friend of hers, who spent christmas with them, and is VP of a major company, was the only company whose bid was reviewed.

It takes a special level of 'listening to paranoid right wing media' to believe that CGI won a no-bid contract for the healthcare.gov rollout because Michelle decided to pressure government agencies into giving preferential treatment to her friends. None of that happened - you should focus your criticisms on what actually happens in the real world so you don't sound like a partisan nut-job.

And here's some light reading for you:
http://www.factcheck.org/2013/12/michelle-obama-and-cgi-federal/
http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/whitley.asp
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 11, 2014, 02:05:40 AM
I never said it was illegal.

I said instead of spending BILLIONS of dollars in the American Economy, creating tens of thousands of American jobs. We decided to give Canada BILLIONS of dollars for their economy, while wasting billions of American dollars on a broken website.

And ill take your word for it that NAFTA does more for America than it does for Canada. But im not talking about NAFTA

Also, lol at "BILLIONS" - where do you get any of your information? All of CGI's many govn't contracts add up to significantly less than a single BILLION, and their IT headquarters are probably located within 50 miles of DC. Just so you know.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 11, 2014, 01:51:32 PM
http://science.time.com/2014/01/09/can-time-predict-your-politics/

Time has a thing where it guesses how liberal/conservative you are.

Was fairly accurate with me, 37% conservative, 63% liberal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 11, 2014, 01:54:51 PM
Not bad, although I think it's a bit wrong for me. By US political standards it's probably correct though - 8% conservative, 92% liberal. In Canada and the UK I'm a bit more centrist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 11, 2014, 02:03:30 PM
I want to know what my browser of choice has to do with my political leanings.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 11, 2014, 02:08:43 PM
I want to know what my browser of choice has to do with my political leanings.

People who use IE are more likely to be conservative fossils.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 11, 2014, 02:13:23 PM
I want to know what my browser of choice has to do with my political leanings.

I'm guessing that younger people are generally more tech-savvy and also more likely to identify as liberal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 11, 2014, 07:08:50 PM
I have no idea how that thing works but it said

You're 97% conservative, 3% liberal

And I even use Chrome
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 11, 2014, 07:52:28 PM
LOL 32% conservative, 68% liberal

This thing is stupid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: casman02 on January 11, 2014, 07:58:18 PM
I got 80 % Conservative 20 % Liberal. In the election quiz (which candidate should you vote for) from a while ago I got
84% Democratic
68% Green
25% Libertarian
23% Republican.

So....yeah
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 11, 2014, 08:04:34 PM
LOL 32% conservative, 68% liberal

This thing is stupid.

hahahaha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 11, 2014, 08:12:23 PM

hahahaha

Time magazine is just perpetuating the stereotype that liberals are the so-called "intellectuals" and conservatives are backwards and old school. It's bullshit.

I also answered truthfully, as most people probably gravitate to the answer that they think they should pick to get the result that they believe best fits them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 11, 2014, 08:15:57 PM
I have no idea how that thing works but it said

You're 97% conservative, 3% liberal

And I even use Chrome

Where do you think the 3% came from?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 11, 2014, 08:18:03 PM
Where do you think the 3% came from?

How many dicks have you sucked in your life? 

A. 0
B. 1
C. 6
D. ∞

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 11, 2014, 08:18:40 PM
LOL 32% conservative, 68% liberal

This thing is stupid.

I just got identical results.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 11, 2014, 08:20:41 PM

I just got identical results.

That's funny, but not that surprising.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 11, 2014, 08:24:55 PM
Definitely not surprising, but most of the questions asked in the survey aren't really things that can be voted on.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 11, 2014, 08:31:46 PM

Definitely not surprising, but most of the questions asked in the survey aren't really things that can be voted on.

The one about whether a country should value its citizens lives more than others. Well of fuckn course they should. Don't you value the lives of your family more?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 11, 2014, 08:33:11 PM
The one about whether a country should value its citizens lives more than others. Well of fuckn course they should. Don't you value the lives of your family more?

I voted slightly agree on that one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 11, 2014, 08:35:00 PM

I voted slightly agree on that one.

Same here. Strongly would imply that other people's lives mean nothing, or something to that effect.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 12, 2014, 12:09:37 AM
I got 78% conservative and 22 Liberal because I dogs more than cats, I think borders are cool and I prefer Times Square to the Met.....I am 50/50 because I think both sides suck balls.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 12, 2014, 12:09:56 AM
I voted slightly agree on that one.

+1
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: FlashGordon on January 12, 2014, 12:16:31 AM
I got 78% conservative and 22 Liberal because I dogs more than cats, I think borders are cool and I prefer Times Square to the Met.....I am 50/50 because I think both sides suck balls.

I'll take it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 12, 2014, 12:22:27 AM
He dogs more than cats.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on January 12, 2014, 10:19:26 AM
That excrement was stupid.  I got 100% Turned It Off After 3 Questions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 12, 2014, 10:45:50 AM
That excrement was stupid.  I got 100% Turned It Off After 3 Questions.

Lack of drive and ambition? Liberal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 12, 2014, 10:48:24 AM
So all the liberals in my Facebook feed are freaking the hell out over this Christie thing. It's insane. I know conservatives can tend to go apeshit over minor things, but looks like manh liberals have been waiting for something negative to say about Christie.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on January 12, 2014, 11:19:15 AM

So all the liberals in my Facebook feed are freaking the hell out over this Christie thing. It's insane. I know conservatives can tend to go apeshit over minor things, but looks like manh liberals have been waiting for something negative to say about Christie.

That's because über partisan people freak the freak out.  Über cons think it's a liberal problem.  über libs think it's a conservative problem.  Meanwhile, the country continues to get more fucked up because all they really want to do is find a way to demonize the other side.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 12, 2014, 11:23:11 AM
He dogs more than cats.

Geez typing from phone is such a pain in the balls.......

It's because I like Dogs more than Cats.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 12, 2014, 06:11:01 PM
That's because über partisan people freak the freak out.  Über cons think it's a liberal problem.  über libs think it's a conservative problem.  Meanwhile, the country continues to get more fucked up because all they really want to do is find a way to demonize the other side.

I realize this more and more as I get older. I spent 8 years defending Bush on a bunch of little excrement only to watch the right do the exact same thing to Obama. It's sickening. If anything Christie is the one guy many liberals could get behind, but that R in his name makes it impossible, lest they end up looking like backward racists.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on January 12, 2014, 06:14:05 PM
I realize this more and more as I get older. I spent 8 years defending Bush on a bunch of little excrement only to watch the right do the exact same thing to Obama. It's sickening. If anything Christie is the one guy many liberals could get behind, but that R in his name makes it impossible, lest they end up looking like backward racists.

In my experience, the racist term has primarily been tossed around when the target can't think of an actual reason he hates Obama.  I've mostly just seen people claiming they're not allowed to hate him because they'll be called racist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 13, 2014, 08:32:07 AM
So all the liberals in my Facebook feed are freaking the hell out over this Christie thing. It's insane. I know conservatives can tend to go apeshit over minor things, but looks like manh liberals have been waiting for something negative to say about Christie.

The only thing this traffic thing reflects now is that Christie might not always have the best judgment choosing staffers.

If it comes out that he knew about it/was behind it, I think it's a story that will stick with him, however bizarre it might seem. It just reads so straightforward - he did something bad to innocent people cause he didn't like their mayor - that it's easy for it to get traction.

If no one uncovers anything that shows he was aware of it, I think it blows over relatively easily.

Edit: Also, disliking 'fusion' food makes me a conservative? Fusion is freaking tacky, snobby liberal elitists like me have no time for that excrement. (64% conservative for me).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 13, 2014, 08:35:16 AM
The thing is, it's never just one thing. Everyone's putting the boot in now, it seems:

http://thinkprogress.org/home/2014/01/13/3152271/6-need-know-federal-investigation-chris-christies-sandy-relief-funds/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 13, 2014, 08:40:29 AM
The thing is, it's never just one thing. Everyone's putting the boot in now, it seems:

http://thinkprogress.org/home/2014/01/13/3152271/6-need-know-federal-investigation-chris-christies-sandy-relief-funds/ (http://thinkprogress.org/home/2014/01/13/3152271/6-need-know-federal-investigation-chris-christies-sandy-relief-funds/)

Well it was some flunky that did it, they have the emails to prove it. So in a few weeks he will apologize, some of his life long friends will be fired, routine stuff, yawn. Oh wait didn't that already happen?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 13, 2014, 08:43:08 AM
The thing is, it's never just one thing. Everyone's putting the boot in now, it seems:

http://thinkprogress.org/home/2014/01/13/3152271/6-need-know-federal-investigation-chris-christies-sandy-relief-funds/

It's an audit. I doubt Christie was dumb enough to use those funds for his own campaign. Some commercials about redeveloping the region included him in it, but it's unfair to call them campaign videos. Doesn't look like much.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 13, 2014, 08:57:19 AM
Well it was some flunky that did it, they have the emails to prove it. So in a few weeks he will apologize, some of his life long friends will be fired, routine stuff, yawn. Oh wait didn't that already happen?

Again, I don't think the story is big enough to stick a year from now, not to mention the actual election.

There are probably going to be a lot of stories like this - he's a brash public figure, people on both sides of the aisle are looking for ways to tear him down, and he's probably been more careless of a politician than the average presidential candidate. But he has the charisma to drown out this kind of noise, I think. If he wins the nomination, I think the national election will come down to whether people think he's a serious populist reformer or just your standard blowhard politician.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 13, 2014, 09:05:36 AM
I understand why the left want to bring him down - they want the GOP to keep putting up far right loonies so that moderates will stay clear - but I think that a centrist, or at least someone willing and able to cross the aisle, is what the country badly wants and needs. I get why vocal factions of Christie's own party want rid of him, but I think that the Democratic-leaning media outlets are no better than their opposite numbers if they're going to try and tear down the first genuine candidate since McCain who appears capable and willing to be the bridge between the two parties that they have been asking for.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 13, 2014, 09:07:39 AM
LOL 32% conservative, 68% liberal

This thing is stupid.

LOL at me getting 76% conservative.  Either Tommy and I are hiding our true identities or that quiz is completely busted.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 13, 2014, 09:14:40 AM
I understand why the left want to bring him down - they want the GOP to keep putting up far right loonies so that moderates will stay clear - but I think that a centrist, or at least someone willing and able to cross the aisle, is what the country badly wants and needs. I get why vocal factions of Christie's own party want rid of him, but I think that the Democratic-leaning media outlets are no better than their opposite numbers if they're going to try and tear down the first genuine candidate since McCain who appears capable and willing to be the bridge between the two parties that they have been asking for.

This is pretty spot on. Depressingly so.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on January 13, 2014, 09:21:24 AM
It's an audit. I doubt Christie was dumb enough to use those funds for his own campaign. Some commercials about redeveloping the region included him in it, but it's unfair to call them campaign videos. Doesn't look like much.

I don't see the issue with the prominent governor of the state appearing in a video assuring people that the shore is open for tourism.  If exclusively state funds were used and it's just suspicious timing, it'll blow over easily.  If he dipped into the federal relief, it's going to sting him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 13, 2014, 09:35:33 AM
I understand why the left want to bring him down - they want the GOP to keep putting up far right loonies so that moderates will stay clear - but I think that a centrist, or at least someone willing and able to cross the aisle, is what the country badly wants and needs. I get why vocal factions of Christie's own party want rid of him, but I think that the Democratic-leaning media outlets are no better than their opposite numbers if they're going to try and tear down the first genuine candidate since McCain who appears capable and willing to be the bridge between the two parties that they have been asking for.

It's absolutely sickening, but it's the world we live in.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 13, 2014, 09:49:47 AM
I understand why the left want to bring him down - they want the GOP to keep putting up far right loonies so that moderates will stay clear - but I think that a centrist, or at least someone willing and able to cross the aisle, is what the country badly wants and needs. I get why vocal factions of Christie's own party want rid of him, but I think that the Democratic-leaning media outlets are no better than their opposite numbers if they're going to try and tear down the first genuine candidate since McCain who appears capable and willing to be the bridge between the two parties that they have been asking for.

Both Christie and Clinton have enough skeletons in their closets.  Obviously Clinton supporters, including members of the media, will want to tear down Christie, because they are afraid of him.  He's the only person that would have a chance against her at this point.  The right wing has a big head start on the Clinton bashing, and have no problem making excrement up to do so.  The latter point could end up biting them in the derriere.  There is no reason to fabricate or embellish with Clinton.  There is enough true stuff out there already to criticize.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 13, 2014, 09:51:37 AM
The thought of Bubba returning to the White House as "First Lady" is pretty hilarious though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 13, 2014, 10:09:38 AM
The thought of Bubba returning to the White House as "First Lady" is pretty hilarious though.

Can you imagine the broads he would get this time around? He can really concentrate on getting derriere as he won't be running the country this time around. That Lincoln bedroom would be a veritable bounce house.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 13, 2014, 10:33:43 AM
Can you imagine the broads he would get this time around? He can really concentrate on getting derriere as he won't be running the country this time around. That Lincoln bedroom would be a veritable bounce house.

Yeah, no black lights allowed in there.  It's going to look like a CSI crime scene.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 13, 2014, 10:38:32 AM
Yeah, no black lights allowed in there.  It's going to look like a CSI crime scene.

Everyone knows they have an open arrangement. He can have one of those ticket machines like at a deli counter. His standard wardrobe will be one of those robes like Hugh Hefner.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 13, 2014, 12:27:30 PM
I understand why the left want to bring him down - they want the GOP to keep putting up far right loonies so that moderates will stay clear - but I think that a centrist, or at least someone willing and able to cross the aisle, is what the country badly wants and needs. I get why vocal factions of Christie's own party want rid of him, but I think that the Democratic-leaning media outlets are no better than their opposite numbers if they're going to try and tear down the first genuine candidate since McCain who appears capable and willing to be the bridge between the two parties that they have been asking for.

There are rumblings that discontented NJ democratic politicians are going to be aggressive about this, accusing Christie of running less of a 'centrist' government but more of a 'bully democrats' government. And that subpoenas for numerous staff members will be issued. I still don't think it's going anywhere, but there's a huge target on his back to take him down before he ever reaches a national election. People who don't fall in lock step with their party are really just crucified.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 11, 2014, 09:53:51 AM
Oops. (http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/02/11/3276171/gop-benghazi-military-hasc/)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 11, 2014, 10:03:38 AM
Oops. (http://thinkprogress.org/world/2014/02/11/3276171/gop-benghazi-military-hasc/)

That is certainly interesting.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 11, 2014, 10:08:52 AM
Considering they couldn't make anyone care that liberals lied about Benghazi, I don't think anyone will care that conservatives lied about it.

Count me among those who didn't care.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 11, 2014, 10:13:12 AM
Considering they couldn't make anyone care that liberals lied about Benghazi, I don't think anyone will care that conservatives lied about it.

Count me among those who didn't care.

Conservatives lie about stuff?  No f'ing way!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 11, 2014, 10:15:07 AM
Conservatives lie about stuff?  No f'ing way!

Right, because politics are a fairy tale with good guys and bad guys.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 11, 2014, 10:16:46 AM
Right, because politics are a fairy tale with good guys and bad guys.

There are good and bad guys on both sides.  I'll be the first to admit that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 11, 2014, 10:20:17 AM
Considering they couldn't make anyone care that liberals lied about Benghazi, I don't think anyone will care that conservatives lied about it.

Count me among those who didn't care.

What lies did the liberals tell about Benghazi? (Genuine question, it wasn't an especially big story up here as I recall and I didn't follow the US coverage of it very closely.)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 11, 2014, 10:26:44 AM
What lies did the liberals tell about Benghazi? (Genuine question, it wasn't an especially big story up here as I recall and I didn't follow the US coverage of it very closely.)

There's been a crusade from the Republicans for the last couple years in which they accused the Obama administration of mishandling the situation and trying to cover it up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Benghazi_attack#Criticism_of_U.S._government_response

I just wanted to point out that the average American, heck, even the average college-educated American didn't give a excrement about Benghazi then, and they certainly don't now. It just never garnered that much attention.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 11, 2014, 10:34:35 AM
There's been a crusade from the Republicans for the last couple years in which they accused the Obama administration of mishandling the situation and trying to cover it up.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2012_Benghazi_attack#Criticism_of_U.S._government_response

I just wanted to point out that the average American, heck, even the average college-educated American didn't give a excrement about Benghazi then, and they certainly don't now. It just never garnered that much attention.

Right, I knew that and that's the point of this report - for all the Republican posturing, their own committee is now saying that actually it wasn't mishandled by the administration at all.

You said that "they couldn't make anyone care that liberals lied about Benghazi" and I'm not sure what lies you meant.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 11, 2014, 10:42:38 AM
This is awkward because I feel like I'm being asked to defend a position I don't hold.

They were accused of lying about the circumstances of the attack. The cause of it, the handling of it, and even the semantics of what Obama called the attack.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 11, 2014, 10:56:23 AM
This is awkward because I feel like I'm being asked to defend a position I don't hold.

They were accused of lying about the circumstances of the attack. The cause of it, the handling of it, and even the semantics of what Obama called the attack.

I'm not attacking you or asking you to defend anything, as I said I didn't follow the story very closely at the time. I was just asking you to clarify what you meant.

If on deeper inspection it turns out that the Republicans accused the administration of lying about their response to the Benghazi situation as it was developing but in fact this report demonstrates that they weren't, your initial post would rather suggest that the Republicans and their media mouthpieces were actually quite successful if they've left someone who by his own admission is ambivalent with the impression that the administration did in fact lie. Which, in turn, would suggest that it's rather important that the Democrats go on the attack with this report, and demand that the GOP face up to the lies and smears that a committee governed by their own party has now proven to be such.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 11, 2014, 11:01:52 AM
Much like Badger I really don't care about it in the sense of that it was mishandled. The US Embassy was attacked and that is significant but how it was handled and reported wasn't. It's a typical Republican witch hunt. Obama and others can be criticized ad nauseum but here, meh. They really should bark up a different tree.

JE: The Republicans were successful in the sense that they fired up their own political bases but in reality most of the country with working brain cells thinks Republicans, the tea party component in particular, are a bunch of right wing tools.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 11, 2014, 11:12:56 AM
I'm not attacking you or asking you to defend anything, as I said I didn't follow the story very closely at the time. I was just asking you to clarify what you meant.

If on deeper inspection it turns out that the Republicans accused the administration of lying about their response to the Benghazi situation as it was developing but in fact this report demonstrates that they weren't, your initial post would rather suggest that the Republicans and their media mouthpieces were actually quite successful if they've left someone who by his own admission is ambivalent with the impression that the administration did in fact lie. Which, in turn, would suggest that it's rather important that the Democrats go on the attack with this report, and demand that the GOP face up to the lies and smears that a committee governed by their own party has now proven to be such.

Of course anyone who lies in the political arena should have to answer for it, and people should know the truth, whatever it is.

My initial reaction of "no one cared then, no one cares now" was based on the notion that being incredibly indignant about Benghazi is a cliche of the average GOP crackpot, to the point where nobody takes it seriously (except for the people who have already cemented themselves in alignment with them).

JE: The Republicans were successful in the sense that they fired up their own political bases but in reality most of the country with working brain cells thinks Republicans, the tea party component in particular, are a bunch of right wing tools.

You got what I meant.

Building on that, I don't know why they waste so much effort on things done to fire up their own political bases (see: VP Sarah Palin). If you're going to cater to the population that didn't think John McCain was Republican enough on his own, you deserve the results you get.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 11, 2014, 11:22:09 AM
OK, maybe I read Badger's comment wrongly or read too much into it, but I took this

Quote
they couldn't make anyone care that liberals lied about Benghazi

to mean that it was now an accepted given that the liberals lied but no-one really cared, which would mean that the GOP would have done their job of convincing people who by their own admission don't care of a reality that wasn't the case.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 11, 2014, 11:23:56 AM
I phrased that poorly. They couldn't make anyone (outside their own base) care about what they were saying.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 11, 2014, 11:32:59 AM
I'll be honest, I never paid much attention to the Benghazi story. My take was that the GOP was using it solely for the purpose of having something to discredit Hillary Clinton with, in case she decided to run for President. It happened while she was Secretary of State, so from what I saw, it was a "See what she let happen then tried to cover up!" finger-pointing exercise.

Politics is a mess. It's nothing more than a fight over who gets to keep control over the do-as-little-as-possible DC machine.

On another note, from my Twitter stream, it appears a vote on the debt ceiling will come today/tonight in anticipation of the snowstorm. From what I'm seeing, the GOP has reversed course yet again and will now hold it hostage again.

Who needs good credit standing anyway?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 11, 2014, 01:33:24 PM
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/02/11/3277961/republicans-clean-debt-ceiling/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 11, 2014, 02:07:27 PM
http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/02/11/3277961/republicans-clean-debt-ceiling/

Maybe I misunderstood the point of the tweets I saw this morning. That's good news. I was really tiring of the GOP holding the country hostage.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 11, 2014, 08:09:33 PM
Yeah republicans and that freaking Obamacare holding this country hostage.

What were they thinking?

Those morons

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 12, 2014, 01:44:58 PM
Posting this here instead of the 4:20 thread.

http://blumenauer.house.gov/images/stories/2014/02-12-14%20Blumenauer%20Rescheduling%20Letter.pdf
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 13, 2014, 01:09:42 PM
http://www.thewrap.com/daily-show-exposes-172-million-federal-penis-pump-spending-video/

Quote
“Daily Show” correspondent Samantha Bee has uncovered a small double standard: While Obamacare critics object to its covering contraception for women, no lawmakers have attacked $172 million in Medicare spending on penis pumps.

Penis pumps, which are vacuum tubes that help men attain erections, cost the government $360 each, according to Ilyse Hogue, president of the National Abortion and Reproductive Rights Action League. Medicare spent $172 million on penis pump claims from 2006 to 2011, NBC News reported.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 13, 2014, 04:06:41 PM
http://www.thewrap.com/daily-show-exposes-172-million-federal-penis-pump-spending-video/


That was such a great bit.  The hypocrisy is out of bounds.  Sam Bee always delivers.

EDIT:  And no, I wouldn't need a penis pump to hit it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 14, 2014, 05:17:49 AM
http://www.thewrap.com/daily-show-exposes-172-million-federal-penis-pump-spending-video/

Not that I really give a excrement about the issue. But I'm willing to guess the money they spent on contraception over that time period is extremely like to be in the multiple billions.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 14, 2014, 06:48:11 AM
Not that I really give a excrement about the issue. But I'm willing to guess the money they spent on contraception over that time period is extremely like to be in the multiple billions.

Money well spent.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 14, 2014, 07:32:00 AM
Money well spent.

Excellent point
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 14, 2014, 07:47:13 AM
It's in the country's best interest that people who can't afford to raise kids don't have kids.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 14, 2014, 09:10:57 AM
It's in the country's best interest that people who can't afford to raise kids don't have kids.

If we're going to get into economic selection then I have a few other criteria I think should be included as well.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 14, 2014, 10:26:54 AM
If we're going to get into economic selection then I have a few other criteria I think should be included as well.

No fatties either. Good call
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 14, 2014, 10:33:38 AM
No fatties either. Good call

Tightly regulated number of gingers as well.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 24, 2014, 08:37:39 AM
Watch all of these.  All of them.  So hilariously done.  Especially the ones about children:

http://youtu.be/PulUKsICY9o
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 18, 2014, 10:43:07 AM
http://bedford.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/ny-joins-pact-to-elect-presidents-by-popular-vote

Do ittttt
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on April 18, 2014, 10:53:30 AM
http://bedford.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/ny-joins-pact-to-elect-presidents-by-popular-vote

Do ittttt

It's almost hard to imagine swing states not being a thing anymore.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 18, 2014, 10:56:07 AM
It's almost hard to imagine swing states not being a thing anymore.

Wouldn't it be glorious?

GFY, Ohio and Florida.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 18, 2014, 10:56:37 AM
http://bedford.patch.com/groups/politics-and-elections/p/ny-joins-pact-to-elect-presidents-by-popular-vote

Do ittttt

On the one hand, I'm all for the popular vote being the determinate factor for the Presidency. On the other, this defeats the purpose of the Electoral College and makes our local votes less meaningful. The best solution is still to get rid of the Electoral College altogether.

Maybe this is one of those "Let's get this done and show everyone how outdated the system actually is, then we'll work on eliminating it" actions?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 18, 2014, 12:22:10 PM
Going with a straight popular vote in all elections would be the most fair.

In the long run it could hurt Democrats in presidential elections though.  Texas is on the verge of becoming a swing state.  With New York and California guaranteed, if Texas starts leaning blue no other state would need to bother voting.  With a straight popular vote this trifecta would be all but eliminated.

From a selfish standpoint, I am in favor of keeping the EC.  My moral side says it should go away.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on April 18, 2014, 12:27:51 PM
From a selfish standpoint, I am in favor of keeping the EC.  My moral side says it should go away.

If minority voters keep on voting overwhelmingly for Democrats, Republicans are going to have a tough time no matter what the election format is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 18, 2014, 03:38:27 PM
If minority voters keep on voting overwhelmingly for Democrats, Republicans are going to have a tough time no matter what the election format is.

But...

You have to account for the fact that CA has a huge redneck/farmer population, as does NY.  Right now their votes are pointless.  Popular vote puts them back in play.  Granted alot of that would be made up in some of the southern states where dem votes are pointless, but it would change the entire game.

If Texas continues to evolve the way it is, it will become the only swing state that matters for dems under the current system.  CA and NY are in the bag.  If you get TX you can't lose.  F FL and F OH at that point.

Either system we go with, I cannot imagine another republican president for the foreseeable future.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 18, 2014, 03:39:55 PM
There is zero legitimate reason to not want popular voting. It's 2014, come on.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 18, 2014, 07:27:02 PM
The swing state thing is annoying, but I'm a traditionalist. I don't think we should change for the sake of changing. If anything I'd like to see changes made to campaign donations, etc. unions and corporations shouldn't be able to donate to campaigns.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 18, 2014, 08:28:52 PM
The swing state thing is annoying, but I'm a traditionalist. I don't think we should change for the sake of changing. If anything I'd like to see changes made to campaign donations, etc. unions and corporations shouldn't be able to donate to campaigns.

They're gonna donate anyway, even if it's illegal for them to do so. They'll just use back channels and all kinds of shady things.

So might as well make it legal so everything is somewhat more transparent.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on April 18, 2014, 09:12:20 PM
The swing state thing is annoying, but I'm a traditionalist. I don't think we should change for the sake of changing. If anything I'd like to see changes made to campaign donations, etc. unions and corporations shouldn't be able to donate to campaigns.

It's not changing for the sake of changing.  It's changing because the system has been horribly outdated for ages.  Tradition isn't a reason to keep things that are broken within the system, although it's frequently used as an excuse to do just that.

As for the other, good luck.  You can make it more difficult by making it illegal, but that's about it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 24, 2014, 07:35:59 AM
John Stewart destroying Sean Hannity (http://theweek.com/article/index/260437/speedreads-jon-stewart-deftly-shows-sean-hannity-why-you-dont-pick-a-fight-with-jon-stewart)

I loved this, Hannity is unwatchable garbage.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 25, 2014, 02:11:52 PM
John Stewart destroying Sean Hannity (http://theweek.com/article/index/260437/speedreads-jon-stewart-deftly-shows-sean-hannity-why-you-dont-pick-a-fight-with-jon-stewart)

I loved this, Hannity is unwatchable garbage.

Saw that as well.  Hannity got his poop pushed in.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on April 25, 2014, 02:58:02 PM
"You are the Arby's news"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 25, 2014, 04:16:07 PM
Arby's...  The Hannity of roast beef.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2014, 06:40:05 AM
I hate all of those shows. I used to watch while Bush was president when they just spent most of the time defending him against dumb attacks from the left, now they spend their time making dumb attacks against Obama. Both sides do this. MSNBC during the Bush years was basically what Fox News is today. Same with John Stewart. He isn't exactly impartial.

The problem is that most viewers have their minds made up already. They watch these shows because listening to people voice your own opinions is comforting. It's a form of entertainment. Watching the other side just makes you angry.

Basically, freak all these shows. Anyone who watches either religiously is just a shill for one side. That's all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on April 27, 2014, 11:21:03 AM
Anyone who watches either religiously is just a shill for one side. That's all.

The Daily Show is funny.  That's why I watch it. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 27, 2014, 12:03:22 PM
The Daily Show is funny.  That's why I watch it. 

I don't watch it as much as I should but is well put together and very funny.

 If an annoying party shill (Hannity) is going to come after Stewart he better do his homework. Which he clearly never does. If you're going to wear the flag on your arm and proclaim yourself a real American, for no reason, you're going to be called out for the arrogant pretentious scumbag that you are. freak Hannity.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2014, 03:27:04 PM
I hate all of those shows. I used to watch while Bush was president when they just spent most of the time defending him against dumb attacks from the left, now they spend their time making dumb attacks against Obama. Both sides do this. MSNBC during the Bush years was basically what Fox News is today. Same with John Stewart. He isn't exactly impartial.

The problem is that most viewers have their minds made up already. They watch these shows because listening to people voice your own opinions is comforting. It's a form of entertainment. Watching the other side just makes you angry.

Basically, freak all these shows. Anyone who watches either religiously is just a shill for one side. That's all.

Sorry Tommy, but you are just wrong here.

Fox lies.  They just lie.  It's not news at all.  The others might be lefties, but at least they use a fact here or there.  What's crazy is the Orly? is actually a really smart and funny guy when he's not on that station.  Watch a broadcast of him and he just lies, and puts the lies to text next to his enormous head.  It's an abortion of a 'news' channel that should run down it's daddy's leg.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2014, 03:30:02 PM
I don't watch it as much as I should but is well put together and very funny.

 If an annoying party shill (Hannity) is going to come after Stewart he better do his homework. Which he clearly never does. If you're going to wear the flag on your arm and proclaim yourself a real American, for no reason, you're going to be called out for the arrogant pretentious scumbag that you are. freak Hannity.

Can I +1 on the 'freak Hannity'?  Oh wait, I just made that part enormous...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 27, 2014, 03:58:09 PM
Sorry Tommy, but you are just wrong here.

Fox lies.  They just lie.  It's not news at all.  The others might be lefties, but at least they use a fact here or there.  What's crazy is the Orly? is actually a really smart and funny guy when he's not on that station.  Watch a broadcast of him and he just lies, and puts the lies to text next to his enormous head.  It's an abortion of a 'news' channel that should run down it's daddy's leg.

The sign of a truly biased person.

Only fox lies the left doesn't right?

If you don't think MSNBC is just as bad as fox (if not worse)  then you're as polar as they come.

Both sides are excrement dishonest and grimey. Fox just has the most viewers of the bunch so they get the most haters.

Pretty sure MSNBC got caught editing footage multiple times to try to make the right look bad.  But only fox lies...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2014, 06:27:40 PM

Sorry Tommy, but you are just wrong here.

Fox lies.  They just lie.  It's not news at all.  The others might be lefties, but at least they use a fact here or there.  What's crazy is the Orly? is actually a really smart and funny guy when he's not on that station.  Watch a broadcast of him and he just lies, and puts the lies to text next to his enormous head.  It's an abortion of a 'news' channel that should run down it's daddy's leg.

Politicians lie. They all do. The lefty networks just pick the republican side and poke holes. Fox just does that for the left. I'll admit that the right can be more cartoonish, but that's because of the bible thumpers. Rachel Maddow is no different than Sean Hannity. She does the exact same thing but with different material.

John Stewart is funny and good at what he does, but only focuses on one side. And why wouldn't he? His target audience are young college students are liberals. You pick a side with this stuff otherwise you run the risk of pissing off your target audience. And this goes regardless of how right he may be. He can still pee off his left leaning viewers, because keep in mind that these viewers are people who have all made up their minds by the way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2014, 06:29:03 PM

The sign of a truly biased person.

Only fox lies the left doesn't right?

If you don't think MSNBC is just as bad as fox (if not worse)  then you're as polar as they come.

Both sides are excrement dishonest and grimey. Fox just has the most viewers of the bunch so they get the most haters.

Pretty sure MSNBC got caught editing footage multiple times to try to make the right look bad.  But only fox lies...

Also CBS was caught forging a fuckn military document so they can run with a story that bush was kicked out for insubordination.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on April 28, 2014, 08:19:39 AM
Politicians lie. They all do. The lefty networks just pick the republican side and poke holes. Fox just does that for the left. I'll admit that the right can be more cartoonish, but that's because of the bible thumpers. Rachel Maddow is no different than Sean Hannity. She does the exact same thing but with different material.

I'm don't watch much MSNBC, or cable news of any sort, but Maddow has knocked out some solid foreign policy reporting/writing over the past few years. Not sure what she reports in other areas, but I've found her writing on foreign policy to be intelligent and insightful, even if you disagree with her positions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 28, 2014, 09:47:57 AM
Politicians lie. They all do. The lefty networks just pick the republican side and poke holes. Fox just does that for the left. I'll admit that the right can be more cartoonish, but that's because of the bible thumpers. Rachel Maddow is no different than Sean Hannity. She does the exact same thing but with different material.

Of course politicians lie.  That wasn't at issue.  To say that Hannity and Madow are remotely the same is absurd.  Madow is obviously as left wing as they come, but the next time she is caught in a lie will be the first.

Quote
John Stewart is funny and good at what he does, but only focuses on one side. And why wouldn't he? His target audience are young college students are liberals. You pick a side with this stuff otherwise you run the risk of pissing off your target audience. And this goes regardless of how right he may be. He can still pee off his left leaning viewers, because keep in mind that these viewers are people who have all made up their minds by the way.

Also just plain wrong.  Stewart has always been equal opportunity at who he bashes.  Republicans just give him more material to work with.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 28, 2014, 09:51:10 AM
I've been watching the Daily Show since the 2000 election, and I find myself increasingly having reactions of "well, that's not the whole story" or "that's not entirely accurate". From a comedic standpoint I don't blame them, it's just easier to pander to the entrenched audience, but it's not equal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 28, 2014, 04:36:30 PM
Sorry Tommy, but you are just wrong here.

Fox lies.  They just lie.  It's not news at all.  The others might be lefties, but at least they use a fact here or there.  What's crazy is the Orly? is actually a really smart and funny guy when he's not on that station.  Watch a broadcast of him and he just lies, and puts the lies to text next to his enormous head.  It's an abortion of a 'news' channel that should run down it's daddy's leg.


HAHAHAHAHA. How's that kool-aid taste? MSNBC is what fox is to the left. Denying it destroys credibility.

By the way, Maddow has knowingly lied about those "evil-doers" the Koch brothers before.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 28, 2014, 04:59:59 PM
In fairness, they are pretty freaking evil.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 28, 2014, 05:16:27 PM
In fairness, they are pretty freaking evil.

Super evil

They donated 100 million dollars to New York-Presbyterian Hospital. This year

The largest donation in the hospitals history.

And (possibly?) matching the largest donation ever to any hospital anywhere

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on April 28, 2014, 06:26:16 PM
Fox News is much better produced than MSNBC.  It inspires more ardent hatred from the left for the same reason it inspires more devotion from the right.  MSNBC doesn't match up in reverse.  It doesn't make it a more honest channel.  It just makes it worse at its partisan reporting.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 28, 2014, 06:30:03 PM
Fox News is much better produced than MSNBC.  It inspires more ardent hatred from the left for the same reason it inspires more devotion from the right.  MSNBC doesn't match up in reverse.  It doesn't make it a more honest channel.  It just makes it worse at its partisan reporting.

Fox has hotter women

And its not even close
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 28, 2014, 06:55:46 PM
In fairness, they are pretty freaking evil.

Watch it two evil scumbags donate a tiny fraction if their net worth, and all their past sins are forgiven.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 28, 2014, 07:06:37 PM
Why are they so evil?

I dont actually follow this kind of excrement, so I legitimately dont know (and really dont even care that much, other than noticing that the lefties hate em)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 28, 2014, 07:21:55 PM
Why are they so evil?

I dont actually follow this kind of excrement, so I legitimately dont know (and really dont even care that much, other than noticing that the lefties hate em)

Lmao, go do some research. I have been reading about the Kochs for 10 years now, a lot of excrement is available on Bloomberg. For the record I don't give a excrement about their politics.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 28, 2014, 06:20:42 PM
Democracy at work.

http://thinkprogress.org/justice/2014/05/28/3442100/redistricting-expert-floridas-gerrymandered-maps-give-an-8-point-advantage-to-republicans/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 28, 2014, 08:15:08 PM
Yeah I'm sure that's exactly what the founding fathers had in mind.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 06, 2014, 12:26:44 PM
I'm sort of fascinated as to what the spin could possibly be on the Berghdal situation. What a freaking disgrace and perfect encapsulation as to how out of touch this administration is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 06, 2014, 12:42:14 PM
I don't understand the outcry. He's a US citizen and a serving soldier. They had a responsibility to bring him home regardless of what he may or may not have done; you can't leave him to rot in the captivity of foreign forces because there's an accusation that he may not be a great soldier. As for trading prisoners from Guantanamo for him, isn't it better to do that than try to send more US soldiers into a theatre of battle they're in the process of leaving and risk losing more lives and/or prisoners with no guarantee of a successful extraction?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 06, 2014, 12:51:54 PM
I don't understand the outcry. He's a US citizen and a serving soldier. They had a responsibility to bring him home regardless of what he may or may not have done; you can't leave him to rot in the captivity of foreign forces because there's an accusation that he may not be a great soldier. As for trading prisoners from Guantanamo for him, isn't it better to do that than try to send more US soldiers into a theatre of battle they're in the process of leaving and risk losing more lives and/or prisoners with no guarantee of a successful extraction?

Setting a precedent that we will negotiate with terrorists?

Wouldn't that just lead to more guys getting captured
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 06, 2014, 01:15:24 PM
I don't understand the outcry. He's a US citizen and a serving soldier. They had a responsibility to bring him home regardless of what he may or may not have done; you can't leave him to rot in the captivity of foreign forces because there's an accusation that he may not be a great soldier. As for trading prisoners from Guantanamo for him, isn't it better to do that than try to send more US soldiers into a theatre of battle they're in the process of leaving and risk losing more lives and/or prisoners with no guarantee of a successful extraction?

Forgetting that this is another example of Obama taking his power of executive order to the extreme (as he used to chastise Bush for doing), by not even notifying Congress of the exchange (which even Obama allies like that idiot Diane Feinstein have chastised him over), the facts are becoming clear that Bergdahl is very likely at best a deserter and could possibly be at worst, a traitor. I understand that as a civilized nation, we place a higher priority in individual lives then others do, and therefore are at an inherent disadvantage in any hostage negotiation, and furthermore I agree with the notion of getting this soldier back and then investigating any possible crimes. That IS NOT what this administration did. In their ignorance, they had Susan Rice ONCE AGAIN make a spectacle of herself on national tv in order to control the narrative that the mighty Obama administration was bringing home a war hero. Not only is this warped, but then Obama cronies have the balls to attempt to disparage members of the military that are trying to speak out and bring light to the facts of what actually occurred.

And honestly, there's only a need to swap out prisoners from Guantanamo because of a self-imposed deadline this administration put on itself so Obama can try to pad his legacy as the guy that closed Gitmo and pulled out of Afganistan, consequences and circumstances be damned.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 06, 2014, 05:18:14 PM
Do some more research.  There are members of congress (both sides) that have been aware of the president's intentions since 2011.  As in, he like discussed it with them in meetings and stuff.

He has every right in the world to do it.  Republicans would have shot it down unless he approved that stupid pipeline anyway that seems to get attached to anything meaningful.  Screw them.  To even compare this to some of the excrement Bush pulled is laughable.

We have been 'negotiating with terrorists' forever.  It's an absurd concept (and term) that has never been followed at any point in american history.  International politics is nothing but negotiating.  Iran/Contra ring a bell?

As for the guy...  I could care less what the situation was over there.  Let him be put on trial here IF the evidence supports it.  I don't hear anybody calling the guy a hero, but I don't watch news 24/7.  If he did something wrong he will have to deal with the consequences.  Any members of the military speaking out specifically about the potential case are actually in violation of military law too.  So there's that...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 06, 2014, 06:23:00 PM
And honestly, there's only a need to swap out prisoners from Guantanamo because of a self-imposed deadline this administration put on itself so Obama can try to pad his legacy as the guy that closed Gitmo and pulled out of Afganistan, consequences and circumstances be damned.

What else do you propose he offered them? Tax breaks? Nexus? A discount on their next light armaments order?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 06, 2014, 08:20:20 PM

Setting a precedent that we will negotiate with terrorists?

Wouldn't that just lead to more guys getting captured

From what I read the guy they released was a Taliban combatant, not an Al Qaeda operative. There's a difference. We don't negotiate with terrorists, but a pow swap during wartime isn't exactly out of line. Israel just did something similar last year if I remember correctly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 06, 2014, 09:33:14 PM
From what I read the guy they released was a Taliban combatant, not an Al Qaeda operative. There's a difference. We don't negotiate with terrorists, but a pow swap during wartime isn't exactly out of line. Israel just did something similar last year if I remember correctly.

But the Taliban isn't a nation at war.

It's a terrorist network, that doesn't fight for any nation

That's why they're not protected by the Geneva convention either.

I don't know how in good conscience anyone could release a terrorist to murder innocent people
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 06, 2014, 11:11:51 PM

But the Taliban isn't a nation at war.

It's a terrorist network, that doesn't fight for any nation

That's why they're not protected by the Geneva convention either.

I don't know how in good conscience anyone could release a terrorist to murder innocent people

A terrorist organization operating in Afghanistan. Their goal isn't global like Al Qaeda or Jamaa Al Ismaliya, etc. Sure they don't get the Geneva convention treatment, but I don't see the outrage over this. Releasing a known Al Qaeda operative would be far far worse. This guy will just get thrown into the mix, and likely end up killed anyway by either the Afghan government or one of our bombs. It's not like he's going to end up blowing up Yankee stadium. The Taliban doesn't operate that way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 06, 2014, 11:12:51 PM
The Taliban were the ruling government of Afghanistan in the post-Soviet era. They may well be utter cunts but they had some degree of political legitimacy, no matter how unpleasantly they gained it. They were reasonably well supported by the US and the UK in a number of ways while they were opposing Russian rule.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 06, 2014, 11:29:07 PM
I'm not even sure why we bother to even detain these guys. They should be killed on the spot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on June 07, 2014, 02:17:01 AM
The Taliban were the ruling government of Afghanistan in the post-Soviet era. They may well be utter cunts but they had some degree of political legitimacy, no matter how unpleasantly they gained it. They were reasonably well supported by the US and the UK in a number of ways while they were opposing Russian rule.

The Taliban didn't even exist during the Soviet War. They didn't appear till much later in the mid 90s.

The U.S. supported the Mujahideen.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on June 07, 2014, 02:18:14 AM
I'm not even sure why we bother to even detain these guys. They should be killed on the spot.

uh...information.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on June 07, 2014, 02:21:43 AM
5 commanders or leaders for 1 grunt is a stupid derriere trade no matter how you put it. Who did the freaking negotiating, Catelyn Stark?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 07, 2014, 06:04:32 AM
5 commanders or leaders for 1 grunt is a stupid derriere trade no matter how you put it. Who did the freaking negotiating, Catelyn Stark?
Tanny.  We were also able to  get an additional 7th rounder for throwing Clyde Gates in the mix.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 07, 2014, 07:48:06 AM
The Taliban didn't even exist during the Soviet War. They didn't appear till much later in the mid 90s.

The U.S. supported the Mujahideen.


Who formed the Taliban after the Russians pulled out in 1992. We're not the Judean People's Front, we're the People's Front of Judea.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 07, 2014, 07:49:19 AM
5 commanders or leaders for 1 grunt is a stupid derriere trade no matter how you put it. Who did the freaking negotiating, Catelyn Stark?

Americans are worth more.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Italian Seafood on June 07, 2014, 09:49:38 AM
I heard we had a black president, I didn't realize it was Isiah Thomas.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on June 07, 2014, 11:46:47 AM
5 commanders or leaders for 1 grunt is a stupid derriere trade no matter how you put it.

no
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 07, 2014, 08:35:56 PM
Guys, you're missing the point. If the demand was for Al Qaeda operatives or commanders, then no chance in hell. These guys are Taliban, so they'll just get thrown back into the rotation and probably end up killed within a year anyway. There's a difference between the Taliban and a terrorist network.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on June 07, 2014, 10:05:28 PM
I think the only way they let this happen was

A.) they turned these guys
B.) they have some way to track them. I honestly wouldn't be surprised if they secretly implanted tracking devices. As ridiculous as that sounds it's hard to  put anything past the government
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 07, 2014, 11:53:08 PM
Probably monitoring their chemtrails.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 09, 2014, 12:49:22 PM
Someone was unfamiliar with the Koch brothers a while back. Here's an article that sheds some light: http://rol.st/1ieunty (http://rol.st/1ieunty)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 09, 2014, 05:24:27 PM
Super evil

They donated 100 million dollars to New York-Presbyterian Hospital. This year

The largest donation in the hospitals history.

And (possibly?) matching the largest donation ever to any hospital anywhere



You've used the "charitable-billionaires-are-undeniably-good-people" argument before, and I admit that it has some merit.  One hundred million dollars to a hospital is an undeniably good thing.  However- hypothetically speaking- if I were a truly evil, greedy billionaire operating in the United States, I would still without a doubt donate substantial sums of money to charity to reap the tax benefit rewards, as well as the all-important PR and political wheel-greasing.  I would make more money by doing so than by not doing so. 

Now with that said, yeah, the Cocks are the freaking worst.  They're the evil versions of Randolph & Mortimer. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 09, 2014, 07:47:49 PM
Someone was unfamiliar with the Koch brothers a while back. Here's an article that sheds some light: http://rol.st/1ieunty (http://rol.st/1ieunty)
This article doesn't really tell you much.

These guys might be evil, but all I read is they don't like minimum wage and unions.

The third "point"  didn't seem to be making a point. That white people watched polls? Didn't Obama have black Panthers watching polls and it got national attention?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 09, 2014, 08:25:23 PM
I didn't realize Bob Bergdahl spoke Arabic at the press conference about his son's release. Why would anyone be surprised that this may have upset people?

"but Duck Dynasty has beards too!"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 10, 2014, 12:07:20 AM
This article doesn't really tell you much.

These guys might be evil, but all I read is they don't like minimum wage and unions.

The third "point"  didn't seem to be making a point. That white people watched polls? Didn't Obama have black Panthers watching polls and it got national attention?

Yes.  Obama himself had Black Panthers watching the polls.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 10, 2014, 01:56:04 AM
Those points are ridiculous.

#1 The Koch brothers aren't alone in wanting to see an end to minimum wage. There's a legit economic reason to be against it, one that could actually help the economy in the long run. Of course, that entirely depends on whether or not we can get illegal immigration under control.

#2 Unions are completely unnecessary in this day and age. Initially their fight was noble, but do building maintenance workers really warrant nearly $20/hour and 3 weeks vacation? Same for nearly all trades. It drives up costs, and the cost of opening new businesses. I say this as a son of two lifetime members of unions.

#3 Are they kidding us with this voter intimidation bullshit? The pollsters on the Upper East Side where I normally vote are all predominately black, and it's a predominately white neighborhood. I never heard of any "voter intimidation". But apparently white pollsters operating in minority neighborhoods is wrong, and can intimidate voters. Also, Voter ID cards should be necessary. There really has to be a better way to ensure free and fair elections in every district. It still amazes me that people can vote without any form of ID at all.

Rolling Stone is such full of excrement. There may be other reasons to hate on the Koch brothers, but they're hardly "ruining" America.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 10, 2014, 05:03:13 AM
Yes.  Obama himself had Black Panthers watching the polls.
And the Koch brothers themselves personally had mostly white people sitting at polls?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 10, 2014, 05:44:27 AM

And the Koch brothers themselves personally had mostly white people sitting at polls?

Old white ladies are way more intimidating that black panthers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 10, 2014, 12:47:03 PM
And the Koch brothers themselves personally had mostly white people sitting at polls?

I didn't say that comment wasn't completely ludicrous.  I was just pointing out that your assertion was equally ludicrous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 10, 2014, 12:54:32 PM
Those points are ridiculous.

#1 The Koch brothers aren't alone in wanting to see an end to minimum wage. There's a legit economic reason to be against it, one that could actually help the economy in the long run. Of course, that entirely depends on whether or not we can get illegal immigration under control.

#2 Unions are completely unnecessary in this day and age. Initially their fight was noble, but do building maintenance workers really warrant nearly $20/hour and 3 weeks vacation? Same for nearly all trades. It drives up costs, and the cost of opening new businesses. I say this as a son of two lifetime members of unions.

#3 Are they kidding us with this voter intimidation bullshit? The pollsters on the Upper East Side where I normally vote are all predominately black, and it's a predominately white neighborhood. I never heard of any "voter intimidation". But apparently white pollsters operating in minority neighborhoods is wrong, and can intimidate voters. Also, Voter ID cards should be necessary. There really has to be a better way to ensure free and fair elections in every district. It still amazes me that people can vote without any form of ID at all.

Rolling Stone is such full of excrement. There may be other reasons to hate on the Koch brothers, but they're hardly "ruining" America.

1 - We'll just have to agree to disagree on minimum wage.  It's a legitimate fact that employers have not self policed themselves over the last 20 years.  Corporation profits have skyrocketed while wages have remained stagnant.

2 - I would happy to see unions go if we could get rid of 'right to (not) work' states.  You should not be able to fire someone without cause, or without providing some form of corrective action.  If the cause is a layoff or position elimination, severance pay should be a mandate.  There is a place between 'right to work' and unions.  Both are bad, but somewhere in between there is something we could all likely agree on.

3 - Utter nonsense.  You don't need to come up with stuff like this to slam the Koch brothers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 10, 2014, 01:12:51 PM


1 - We'll just have to agree to disagree on minimum wage.  It's a legitimate fact that employers have not self policed themselves over the last 20 years.  Corporation profits have skyrocketed while wages have remained stagnant.

2 - I would happy to see unions go if we could get rid of 'right to (not) work' states.  You should not be able to fire someone without cause, or without providing some form of corrective action.  If the cause is a layoff or position elimination, severance pay should be a mandate.  There is a place between 'right to work' and unions.  Both are bad, but somewhere in between there is something we could all likely agree on.

3 - Utter nonsense.  You don't need to come up with stuff like this to slam the Koch brothers.

If mandatory severance pay was implemented for a struggling company, they would need to lay off even more people. And cut others hours as well

Would people be better off if 10 people got laid off with severance pay instead of 3 without?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 10, 2014, 01:23:38 PM
1 - We'll just have to agree to disagree on minimum wage.  It's a legitimate fact that employers have not self policed themselves over the last 20 years.  Corporation profits have skyrocketed while wages have remained stagnant.

2 - I would happy to see unions go if we could get rid of 'right to (not) work' states.  You should not be able to fire someone without cause, or without providing some form of corrective action.  If the cause is a layoff or position elimination, severance pay should be a mandate.  There is a place between 'right to work' and unions.  Both are bad, but somewhere in between there is something we could all likely agree on.

3 - Utter nonsense.  You don't need to come up with stuff like this to slam the Koch brothers.

I'm generally letting the article stand on its own because as I said, someone was completely unfamiliar with the Koch brothers, and I saw the article so I linked it.

The only thing I'll bother to address, because I don't feel like fighting about this stuff, is #3. I think the point of highlighting that in the article was because it shines a light on the fact that the Koch brothers have numerous entities that they fund behind the scenes that influence the government. It was simply one example of numerous ones, and IIRC the article named a few "organizations" they fund.

But as the Supreme Court showed in the Citizens United ruling: money talks. If you have more than anyone else, you get to have the loudest voice. Gah blez 'Merica!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 10, 2014, 01:26:47 PM
I'm generally letting the article stand on its own because as I said, someone was completely unfamiliar with the Koch brothers, and I saw the article so I linked it.

The only thing I'll bother to address, because I don't feel like fighting about this stuff, is #3. I think the point of highlighting that in the article was because it shines a light on the fact that the Koch brothers have numerous entities that they fund behind the scenes that influence the government. It was simply one example of numerous ones, and IIRC the article named a few "organizations" they fund.

But as the Supreme Court showed in the Citizens United ruling: money talks. If you have more than anyone else, you get to have the loudest voice. Gah blez 'Merica!
I'm curious, do you and fen happen to think that George soros is equally evil?

Since I'm pretty sure he's quite similar to Kochs except on the other side of the aisle
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 10, 2014, 01:45:34 PM
I'm curious, do you and fen happen to think that George soros is equally evil?

Since I'm pretty sure he's quite similar to Kochs except on the other side of the aisle

I think anyone who uses money to purchase politics is evil.

The reason I practically begged people not to vote for Obama the first time is because he showed he was exactly like the rest of Washington when he abandoned campaign finance reform the moment it served him to do so.

Politics should not be available for purchase. Period.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 10, 2014, 04:55:25 PM

If mandatory severance pay was implemented for a struggling company, they would need to lay off even more people. And cut others hours as well

Would people be better off if 10 people got laid off with severance pay instead of 3 without?

Or...  It would require the company to put a little more thought into layoffs as the best way to increase revenue for the shareholders.

I know you really don't understand the concept of 'middle ground'.  The idea of compromise went out the window in November of 2010, I get it.

I am a left leaning moderate that has a fairly good understanding of economics.  I support unions, but would throw them out if 'right to work' states went away as well.  Employees should not have to sign away any right to recourse just to get a excrement (or even good) job.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 10, 2014, 04:59:12 PM
I think anyone who uses money to purchase politics is evil.

The reason I practically begged people not to vote for Obama the first time is because he showed he was exactly like the rest of Washington when he abandoned campaign finance reform the moment it served him to do so.

Politics should not be available for purchase. Period.

How was Obama different than anyone else that was running, other than the fact he raised his money from more individual donors than anyone pretty much ever?

If he didn't take any big money, Hillary would have been president 8 years sooner, because there is no way in hell she isn't accepting.

With that said, I am 100% in favor of gutting the campaign finance laws currently on the books.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 10, 2014, 05:55:26 PM


Or...  It would require the company to put a little more thought into layoffs as the best way to increase revenue for the shareholders.

I know you really don't understand the concept of 'middle ground'.  The idea of compromise went out the window in November of 2010, I get it.

I am a left leaning moderate that has a fairly good understanding of economics.  I support unions, but would throw them out if 'right to work' states went away as well.  Employees should not have to sign away any right to recourse just to get a excrement (or even good) job.



There's not a single person on these boards who thinks you're a left leaning moderate..

And your understanding of economics is nonexistent if you think laying people off somehow increases revenue
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 10, 2014, 07:07:39 PM
There's not a single person on these boards who thinks you're a left leaning moderate..

Sadly there's no reasonable way of preventing you from spewing your ill informed, childlike and cuntish opinions, but I'd appreciate it if you don't go speaking for everyone else on the board.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 10, 2014, 07:09:21 PM
Sadly there's no reasonable way of preventing you from spewing your ill informed, childlike and cuntish opinions, but I'd appreciate it if you don't go speaking for everyone else on the board.

The guys the most far left person on these boards by far

Him calling him self left leaning moderate, would be like me declaring myself national spelling bee champion.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 10, 2014, 07:17:02 PM
The guys the most far left person on these boards by far

Him calling him self left leaning moderate, would be like me declaring myself national spelling bee champion.



No. That's a ridiculous statement to make for reasons that should be obvious to anyone capable of exercising the slightest bit of logic. Now shut up with your idiocy, please. You're making the board a dumber place with every post and I'm scared it will spread.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 10, 2014, 07:24:23 PM
Quote
The only thing polarizing about Obama is the color of his skin.  A republican couldn't ask for a more moderate democratic president.

Calling Obamacare moderate

Quote
What's NOT moderate about it.  I wanted single payer.  Obama wanted single payer.  He made a compromise to ensure that people would be covered one way or the other.  If you don't see how it's going to save this country billions in the long term...  You need to go back to school.

I guess its just his definition of "moderate"

Hes certainly as moderate as Obama and Obamacare.

Ill give him credit there
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 10, 2014, 07:31:21 PM
I guess its just his definition of "moderate"

Versus yours. Which is the point that you're failing to understand, because you're too young, too dumb and too arrogant to conceive of any possible way in which any view other than yours could carry any validity, and you're more than happy to make up the numbers to prove it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 10, 2014, 07:39:55 PM
Versus yours. Which is the point that you're failing to understand, because you're too young, too dumb and too arrogant to conceive of any possible way in which any view other than yours could carry any validity, and you're more than happy to make up the numbers to prove it.

Im not arguing that his opinions on political matters are valid or valid.  I dont agree with them, but thats a different story.

Im pointing out his inability to acknowledge his personal biases. I can be extremely freaking argumentative, and I know and admit it. Im a terrible speller and admit it.

This is a guy who is clearly far to the left by all measures (he wants the govt to control healthcare HIS words, thinks the only reason people dont like Obama is because hes black, thinks MSNBC is completely honest but fox is the devil). Im sorry but having EXTREME viewpoints and then saying oh yeah im a "left leaning moderate" is just bullshit. Flat freaking out.

Now if youre talking him being a left leaning moderate on a global scale or compared to europeans or something thats one thing. But im pretty sure hes from the USA, and on the USA political spectrum hes quite far to the left
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 10, 2014, 08:29:50 PM
We all have biases. And our biases affect our viewpoints. This is why liberals get their information from ThinkProgress, MSNBC, DailyKos, NPR, NY Times etc. People like reading things that reinforce their beliefs. Same with conservatives and sites like Hotair, Townhall, Fox News, WSJ, etc. It's all a bunch of "Lolz look how the other side is ruining America". It's all bullshit. We like listening to people who hold the same views as us, and any contrarian opinion makes us want to punch a kitten. It's human nature.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 10, 2014, 11:41:51 PM
Versus yours. Which is the point that you're failing to understand, because you're too young, too dumb and too arrogant to conceive of any possible way in which any view other than yours could carry any validity, and you're more than happy to make up the numbers to prove it.

With all due respect to both you and Fen, Fen calling himself a moderate is a stretch, especially when he's advocating for single payer.

And honestly, I know its a cherrypicked quote from a while ago, but I take issue with Fen not only stating that the only thing polarizing about Obama is the color of his skin, but therefore in the same breath flatly implying that those that are anti-Obama are racist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 10, 2014, 11:53:46 PM
With all due respect to both you and Fen, Fen calling himself a moderate is a stretch, especially when he's advocating for single payer.

And honestly, I know its a cherrypicked quote from a while ago, but I take issue with Fen not only stating that the only thing polarizing about Obama is the color of his skin, but therefore in the same breath flatly implying that those that are anti-Obama are racist.

I remember him saying that, too. Ha @ moderate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 11, 2014, 06:52:01 AM
But the three of you are long proven to be somewhere slightly to the right of Ghenghis Khan on the political spectrum. You probably all think you're moderates as well.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 11, 2014, 07:00:53 AM
But the three of you are long proven to be somewhere slightly to the right of Ghenghis Khan on the political spectrum. You probably all think you're moderates as well.
Nope. Fox news is biased and ridiculous , MSNBC is biased and ridiculous . Bush fucked up, Obama fucked up.

I'm definitely to the right of the spectrum.  I still think the right is bad, but the left is just freaking horrid.

I can say with confidence that I'm financially conservative and on social issues don't give a floppy freak. And I'd prefer a Republican 9/10 times for economic policy alone (not that it's ideal) . I just wish they would abandon all this Jesus religious bullshit..

I think ideally I'd want someone who is financially like Ron Paul, but without a lot of his bizarre other beliefs  and or Craziness
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 11, 2014, 12:42:28 PM
How was Obama different than anyone else that was running, other than the fact he raised his money from more individual donors than anyone pretty much ever?

If he didn't take any big money, Hillary would have been president 8 years sooner, because there is no way in hell she isn't accepting.

With that said, I am 100% in favor of gutting the campaign finance laws currently on the books.

That's a simple one to answer. The big idealist with all of his fanciful concepts for improving America could have started with the very realistic idea of actual campaign finance reform. He stumped hard on that one. That is, until he saw he could milk more than his competitors.

That's when he proved he was just like all the rest. Except the rest weren't promising ridiculous things like shutting down Gitmo, or that the wars would be over in two years, or letting people believe they would receive "get out of mortgage free" cards.

I'm 100% for changing campaign finance laws (something the Koch brothers are heavily investing in not allowing). My only reason to bring it up regarding Obama was that it was his first action as a candidate that showed exactly the type of President he'd be: just like all the rest, he'll promise you an ocean, then spit on you from on-high.

He isn't any different from anyone else. The reason I spoke against him was because he had people fooled into thinking he was.

Sadly there's no reasonable way of preventing you from spewing your ill informed, childlike and cuntish opinions, but I'd appreciate it if you don't go speaking for everyone else on the board.

This.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 11, 2014, 08:30:56 PM
I remember telling all the Obama sheep back in 2008 that he'll end up just like every other president, but no, Obama will be different! Yeah, right.

I also knew that the Right would poke holes into every little thing that he does just like the Left did with Bush. It never changes. It's a neverending cycle. The only difference is that more people are involved in politics today than ever before, thanks in large part to cable TV and the internet. Everyone has a fuckn' opinion. Opinion columns used to be a thing on page 20 of the local newspaper, now there are TV shows dedicated to it, and most online news sites are 50%+ opinion.

BTW I consider myself fairly moderate. Right on fiscal issues, Left on social. That's essentially the definition of moderate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 11, 2014, 08:35:23 PM
BTW I consider myself fairly moderate. Right on fiscal issues, Left on social. That's essentially the definition of moderate.

"I like a spliff when I'm drunk and I want to know I can buy a chick an abortion if I accidentally get her up the spout" does not constitute "left on social".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 11, 2014, 09:28:41 PM
Im not arguing that his opinions on political matters are valid or valid.  I dont agree with them, but thats a different story.

Im pointing out his inability to acknowledge his personal biases. I can be extremely freaking argumentative, and I know and admit it. Im a terrible speller and admit it.

This is a guy who is clearly far to the left by all measures (he wants the govt to control healthcare HIS words, thinks the only reason people dont like Obama is because hes black, thinks MSNBC is completely honest but fox is the devil). Im sorry but having EXTREME viewpoints and then saying oh yeah im a "left leaning moderate" is just bullshit. Flat freaking out.

Now if youre talking him being a left leaning moderate on a global scale or compared to europeans or something thats one thing. But im pretty sure hes from the USA, and on the USA political spectrum hes quite far to the left

What EXTREME viewpoints?  Single payer?  Works for every other civilized country in the world.

I never said MSNBC wasn't biased, ever.  But yes, I believe a massive amount of the hate Obama gets is because of the color of his skin.  Anyone who disagrees is just fooling themselves.

As for the rest of your drivel, just note my sig.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 11, 2014, 09:43:11 PM

I never said MSNBC wasn't biased, ever.  But yes, I believe a massive amount of the hate Obama gets is because of the color of his skin.  Anyone who disagrees is just fooling themselves.

This is complete bullshit. And it's also impossible to disprove. That's why I immediately dismiss the opinions of anyone who actually believes this excrement.

The shitty part is that the media and many of Obama's supporters have been using that card since before his first election. "If Obama doesn't get elected, it's because America is racist and doesn't want a black President." "Of course Obama won't win any Red States because he's black, and Southerners are all racists." "Obama won the election, but people are unhappy, it must be because they're racist." "People who disagree with Obama are racists."

It's bullshit.

I remember Chris Matthews on Letterman before the election, basically pleading with people to go out and vote "like their children would." "Children don't judge based on the color of others' skin. So go out and vote like your children." Dude basically got a standing ovation for that. The only reason people like you believe that Obama gets the majority of his criticism because he's black is because YOU FUCKERS HAVE CONVINCED YOURSELVES since the beginning. Not for any other reason.

excrement pisses me off.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 11, 2014, 09:47:54 PM
Tommy pretty much said everything I wanted to say on Obama getting an immense amount of hate because he's black...it's like people on the left forget about the vitriol they spewed towards W, and don't realize that some people irrational hating the President comes with the job.

And JE I completely disagree that I'm farther to the left then Attila the Hun. I don't expect you to know my personal political beliefs, but I don't think Attila would be pro marriage equality, or pro-choice to an extent.

Single payer doesn't work. Why is it everyone from a country that offers single-payer comes here for their medical issues if they have the cash? Because people that are intelligent don't go into medicine when the pay is excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 11, 2014, 09:48:47 PM
Can't wait for 8 years of "it's because she's a woman."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 11, 2014, 09:55:14 PM
I'm not necessarily against single payer for basic insurance if it were practical, but it's not. Look at our budget. We already pay way more per capita in terms of tax dollars for Medicare/Medicaid than Canadian citizens pay for their universal healthcare. Something ain't right.

There's a lot of things wrong with the insurance system, and I think Obamacare was definitely not the way to go about it. Creating more taxes and another bureaucracy isn't solving the problem. It's actually a step in the entirely wrong direction.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 11, 2014, 10:00:23 PM
The whole concept of healthcare delivery as a profit-driven industry is utterly fucked, but free market obsessives can't or won't understand that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 11, 2014, 10:01:06 PM
Can't wait for 8 years of "it's because she's a woman."

Of course that's what the news will focus on. CNN or some other stupid news site will go on twitter and search for "female president" and pick out any dumb tweets from idiots saying things like "Yo I don't want a female president lolz" and then post an article entitled "America isn't ready for a female president. Look at these tweets!!"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 11, 2014, 10:03:56 PM
The whole concept of healthcare delivery as a profit-driven industry is utterly fucked, but free market obsessives can't or won't understand that.

Fine, but don't expect pharma companies to spend billions in R&D for new drug developments. You can't have both. It's either "free basic healthcare for everyone and substandard drugs" or "premium healthcare for most people, free emergency care for all people, and awesome life-saving drugs for everyone at a cost."

I'm sure there's a happy medium, but we'd essentially have to destroy the framework of the healthcare industry and rebuild from scratch.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 11, 2014, 10:19:10 PM
Fine, but don't expect pharma companies to spend billions in R&D for new drug developments. You can't have both. It's either "free basic healthcare for everyone and substandard drugs" or "premium healthcare for most people, free emergency care for all people, and awesome life-saving drugs for everyone at a cost."

I'm sure there's a happy medium, but we'd essentially have to destroy the framework of the healthcare industry and rebuild from scratch.

Hence my specific and careful use of the term "healthcare delivery", but I do understand the difficult reality of moving away from a private, profit-oriented point of care system. Doesn't mean it shouldn't happen, but it's virtually impossible in an environment where politics is owned by those most willing and capable of buying influence, so without proper overhaul of campaign finance rules it's kind of an irrelevant conversation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 11, 2014, 10:39:25 PM
Hence my specific and careful use of the term "healthcare delivery", but I do understand the difficult reality of moving away from a private, profit-oriented point of care system. Doesn't mean it shouldn't happen, but it's virtually impossible in an environment where politics is owned by those most willing and capable of buying influence, so without proper overhaul of campaign finance rules it's kind of an irrelevant conversation.

My problem with the current situation is that they haven't really moved away from that profit-oriented system at all. They just took a excrement structure and wrapped some duct tape around it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 11, 2014, 10:56:12 PM
My problem with the current situation is that they haven't really moved away from that profit-oriented system at all. They just took a excrement structure and wrapped some duct tape around it.

I agree with this for the most part.  At the end of the day, thanks to the mandate, we will be saving a ton of cash because insurance companies will be eating the costs of folks that were previously uninsured.

Also, the pharm argument doesn't hold water in a single payer system.  The massive amount of tax dollars saved would likely go to R&D funding anyway.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 12, 2014, 05:32:33 AM
My problem with the current situation is that they haven't really moved away from that profit-oriented system at all. They just took a excrement structure and wrapped some duct tape around it.
Nobody accepts this garbage derriere insurance either.

Especially as far as surgeons go its nuts. Nobody wants to touch the excrement off the exchange. I know out on long Island a ton of the hospitals won't accept the aca crap  at all. Even Stony Brook long islands largest state hospital won't have anything to do with it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 12, 2014, 05:38:15 AM
I agree with this for the most part.  At the end of the day, thanks to the mandate, we will be saving a ton of cash because insurance companies will be eating the costs of folks that were previously uninsured.

Also, the pharm argument doesn't hold water in a single payer system.  The massive amount of tax dollars saved would likely go to R&D funding anyway.
And where do you think those costs the insurance companies are eating will go? They're gonna just spread the cost down to the user.

Which is why they're restricting benefits, strictly limiting access to care by only negotiating with limited numbers of providers. These plans have huge deductibles many are high deductible plans (you need to pay like the first 5-6 grand before the insurance kicks in). And then they bundle together services that the user wouldn't want or need.

Everything's a mess, and as a result were going to see a wild transformation in healthcare in the very near future. People are going to get treated over the Internet by some doctor in India, insurance companies will be managing your health (not just your insurance)

Massive change is coming, and I don't think it'll be for the better

Also big pharma wouldn't save excrement. In a single payer system the govt can grab companies by the balls controlling prices and what not. So big pharma would lose wild amounts of cash not save it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 12, 2014, 11:19:26 AM
The entire ACA is a mess. I'm not pro-one-payer, but even that would have been better than the slapdick "solution" the government came up with. What we needed was healthcare reform. Instead we got a system that is more expensive and covers less for the majority who already had some form of healthcare.

The idea that the HMOs would absorb any cost is utterly ridiculous. Anyone who pays any attention to corporate America already knew none of them would do anything less than pass the new costs down to the customer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 12, 2014, 11:43:13 AM
The entire ACA is a mess. I'm not pro-one-payer, but even that would have been better than the slapdick "solution" the government came up with. What we needed was healthcare reform. Instead we got a system that is more expensive and covers less for the majority who already had some form of healthcare.

The idea that the HMOs would absorb any cost is utterly ridiculous. Anyone who pays any attention to corporate America already knew none of them would do anything less than pass the new costs down to the customer.

This American Life did a great 2-part episode about the history and problems of our healthcare system. It was really interesting, they did a great job of laying out how things got to where they are, and how all three sides (patients, doctors, insurers) contributed to freaking it up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on June 12, 2014, 12:03:30 PM
This American Life

Didn't you hear? NPR = biased liberal bullshit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 12, 2014, 12:14:34 PM
Didn't you hear? NPR = biased liberal bullshit.

I know you're joking, but they made a complete overhaul seem like the best/only way to fix the system and didn't plug ACA or anything (this was a few years before that anyway).

There was supposed to be a second half to my post about all that but I didn't feel like writing it up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 12, 2014, 12:22:54 PM
I know you're joking, but they made a complete overhaul seem like the best/only way to fix the system and didn't plug ACA or anything (this was a few years before that anyway).

There was supposed to be a second half to my post about all that but I didn't feel like writing it up.

It is. Top to bottom, the entire system is flawed. And not because it's a profit-based system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 12, 2014, 12:26:12 PM
Found them. Both have transcripts.

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/391/more-is-less

http://www.thisamericanlife.org/radio-archives/episode/392/someone-elses-money
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 12, 2014, 06:26:54 PM
Well, it's true. The whole system is messed up. Good luck overhauling it though. Healthcare is a massive industry that employs millions of people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 24, 2014, 04:22:46 PM
Chris Christie must be getting bored of hearing about bridges.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/24/chris-christie-bridge-scandal_n_5525593.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 24, 2014, 04:25:16 PM
Chris Christie must be getting bored of hearing about bridges.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/24/chris-christie-bridge-scandal_n_5525593.html

If you believe that, Puck has a bridge to sell you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 24, 2014, 07:33:10 PM
Of course the media is out to get him. He's the only republican with a good shot at 2016.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 15, 2014, 12:46:20 PM
All of you under the age of 30: you're stupid and you don't know what you're talking about. (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/millennials-economics-voting-clueless-kids-these-days/374427/)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 15, 2014, 01:22:29 PM
All of you under the age of 30: you're stupid and you don't know what you're talking about. (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/millennials-economics-voting-clueless-kids-these-days/374427/)

It's almost as if several million people have conflicting views.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on July 15, 2014, 01:37:51 PM
It's almost as if several million people have conflicting views.

Shut up idiot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 15, 2014, 02:32:32 PM
All of you under the age of 30: you're stupid and you don't know what you're talking about. (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/millennials-economics-voting-clueless-kids-these-days/374427/)
I thought it was common knowledge that young people are politically freaking retarded

Which is why most people on these boards likely tend to agree with them on most political issues
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 15, 2014, 02:46:24 PM
There's a faulty implication that the same (or equally silly) contradictions don't exist in every age group.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 15, 2014, 03:00:03 PM
I thought it was common knowledge that young people are politically freaking retarded

You are living proof of that statement. Now shut up and freak off out of this thread until you've turned 30.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 15, 2014, 03:03:26 PM
You are living proof of that statement. Now shut up and freak off out of this thread until you've turned 30.
Say what you want, but the political views described in that article sounds far more like you than me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 15, 2014, 03:45:21 PM
Say what you want, but the political views described in that article sounds far more like you than me.

Some of them. Did you actually read the article, or did you just read "blah blah blah liberal bad"?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 15, 2014, 06:38:57 PM
People tend to mature throughout their 20s, and their political views are no different. I was a borderline communist in HS, became a right wing nut in college, but steadily became more and more libertarian as I got older.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 15, 2014, 07:17:47 PM
People tend to mature throughout their 20s, and their political views are no different. I was a borderline communist in HS, became a right wing nut in college, but steadily became more and more libertarian as I got older.



meh I dont know if I buy it.

Sure people in their 20s are naive morons

But so are people in their 30s, 40s, and 50s.

You still got people on the left who are grown derriere adults that think everything happening right now is Bushes fault and Obama is the greatest president ever

And people on the right who still think the rapture is coming, and that anyone who doesnt praise jesus is evil as well

People are insane, irrational, idiots at all ages and sides of the spectrum.

now the stupidity might change from social issues, to healthcare and finances as they get older

But its still stupidity
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 15, 2014, 07:18:22 PM
People tend to mature throughout their 20s, and their political views are no different. I was a borderline communist in HS, became a right wing nut in college, but steadily became more and more libertarian as I got older.
What's the next phase?  Jewish Nazi?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on July 15, 2014, 07:19:43 PM
"borderline communist"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 15, 2014, 07:53:40 PM
I was relatively right wing when I was younger, but have become more moderate as I have grown older and learned more about the world. I'm still absolutely a capitalist - it's hard to be otherwise when you're in the job I am - but I'm also a big fan of the government taking a reasonable amount of it off me and doing stuff for society with that money, because for all their failings they do a damn sight better job of improving the lot of society as a whole with it than I would.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 15, 2014, 09:15:16 PM
I was relatively right wing when I was younger, but have become more moderate as I have grown older and learned more about the world. I'm still absolutely a capitalist - it's hard to be otherwise when you're in the job I am - but I'm also a big fan of the government taking a reasonable amount of it off me and doing stuff for society with that money, because for all their failings they do a damn sight better job of improving the lot of society as a whole with it than I would.

I fundamentally agree with this, and I'm not one of those "health care isn't a right!!!" assholes. Health care should be a basic right in today's society, but it isn't an easy solution as liberals make it out to be. The problem I have with liberals today is that they have way too much faith in the government to handle these sorts of issues simply by raising taxes and spending.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on July 16, 2014, 01:12:02 AM
People tend to mature throughout their 20s, and their political views are no different. I was a borderline communist in HS, became a right wing nut in college, but steadily became more and more libertarian as I got older.



I live in a city with a lot of liberal idiots.  I just took a cruise which found me surrounded by right wing idiots.  Some people are just idiots.

Also, after hearing liberals make fun of right wing southern rednecks...I had a right wing southern redneck tell me he wants to kill all California city folk.  That was fun.  Stereotypes cut both ways.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on July 16, 2014, 01:15:44 AM
I fundamentally agree with this, and I'm not one of those "health care isn't a right!!!" assholes. Health care should be a basic right in today's society, but it isn't an easy solution as liberals make it out to be. The problem I have with liberals today is that they have way too much faith in the government to handle these sorts of issues simply by raising taxes and spending.

I love when people point to Canada on health care and Finland on education and fail to grasp the size argument.  Canada has a population barely more than 10% of that of the US.  Finland has a student population smaller than that of Los Angeles Unified.  I'm all in favor of running single payer health care at a very small level.  I don't trust the federal government to do much of anything, and I don't think it does anything well but support donor interests.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 16, 2014, 01:42:43 AM
I love when people point to Canada on health care and Finland on education and fail to grasp the size argument.  Canada has a population barely more than 10% of that of the US.  Finland has a student population smaller than that of Los Angeles Unified.  I'm all in favor of running single payer health care at a very small level.  I don't trust the federal government to do much of anything, and I don't think it does anything well but support donor interests.

People also forget that U.S taxpayers already pay more, in terms of percentage of their tax dollars, to Medicare and Medicaid than Canadian taxpayers pay for a single government provider. It's not as simple as "tax the rich、they have too much money lol".

It's funny because all of this information is available to the public, but no one bothers to actually look up the data for themselves. The government's balance sheet for each year is on their website, as is their budget for future years. Most people, liberals and conservatives, just wait for like-minded bloggers or news analysts to interpret the data for them. What happens is a ton of opinions, more than facts, being thrown around the internet. In the past it used to be hearsay and rumors. Now it's a bunch of stupid opinions that are based on nothing. Which is worse?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 16, 2014, 07:16:19 AM
I fundamentally agree with this, and I'm not one of those "health care isn't a right!!!" assholes. Health care should be a basic right in today's society, but it isn't an easy solution as liberals make it out to be. The problem I have with liberals today is that they have way too much faith in the government to handle these sorts of issues simply by raising taxes and spending.

OK, but let's not pretend that those on the left are the only party who want to tax and spend. I'm just more supportive of those who want to tax the wealthy and use it to help the less fortunate than those who want to tax the middle class and pour it into the military-industrial complex.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on July 16, 2014, 07:33:59 AM
People tend to mature as they age? There's still hope for me?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on July 16, 2014, 07:37:55 AM
OK, but let's not pretend that those on the left are the only party who want to tax and spend. I'm just more supportive of those who want to tax the wealthy and use it to help the less fortunate than those who want to tax the middle class and pour it into the military-industrial complex.

Oh great another commie pinko that doesn't want the top 10% to literally own everything, what's wrong with you man?

My greatest problem, is the wealth disparity that we are just sitting here, watching unfold before our eyes. It's ridiculous and it will be our downfall. As the middle class, with voting power, I am saying we are just slowly but surely giving away everything. We are freaking dumb.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2014, 08:40:50 AM
People also forget that U.S taxpayers already pay more, in terms of percentage of their tax dollars, to Medicare and Medicaid than Canadian taxpayers pay for a single government provider. It's not as simple as "tax the rich、they have too much money lol".

It's funny because all of this information is available to the public, but no one bothers to actually look up the data for themselves. The government's balance sheet for each year is on their website, as is their budget for future years. Most people, liberals and conservatives, just wait for like-minded bloggers or news analysts to interpret the data for them. What happens is a ton of opinions, more than facts, being thrown around the internet. In the past it used to be hearsay and rumors. Now it's a bunch of stupid opinions that are based on nothing. Which is worse?

But they said we have worse healthcare than Cuba doe
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2014, 08:42:15 AM
I live in a city with a lot of liberal idiots.  I just took a cruise which found me surrounded by right wing idiots.  Some people are just idiots.

Also, after hearing liberals make fun of right wing southern rednecks...I had a right wing southern redneck tell me he wants to kill all California city folk.  That was fun.  Stereotypes cut both ways.

Kind of off topic, but do you know a lot of people who are "spiritual but not religious"?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 16, 2014, 08:46:21 AM
OK, but let's not pretend that those on the left are the only party who want to tax and spend. I'm just more supportive of those who want to tax the wealthy and use it to help the less fortunate than those who want to tax the middle class and pour it into the military-industrial complex.
Let's be honest the right doesn't want to tax the middle class, there's no money there.

The difference is the treatment of the rich and the poor. Both parties are relatively similar on the middle Class

The right wants the poor to pay something, the left wants to give them something

The lefts definition if mega rich is like over 100k a year (im pulling this number out of my derriere)  the rights might be over 1million a year


Both parties will give all their friends and buddies bullshit money

The right might give money to corporations and crap, the left gives it to big unions and big union companies. There's very little difference between the corruption on each side

Which is why I don't think of myself as liking the right, I just hate the left more
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 16, 2014, 08:57:34 AM
Until you realize you are an idiot, you are an even bigger idiot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2014, 09:00:29 AM
Let's be honest the right doesn't want to tax the middle class, there's no money there.

The difference is the treatment of the rich and the poor. Both parties are relatively similar on the middle Class

The right wants the poor to pay something, the left wants to give them something

The lefts definition if mega rich is like over 100k a year (im pulling this number out of my derriere)  the rights might be over 1million a year

I think this was closer to the go-to number:

Quote
Based on 2009 tax year filing data, the Internal Revenue Service says an adjusted gross income, or AGI, of $343,927 or more will put you in the top 1 percent of taxpayers.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on July 16, 2014, 09:04:29 AM
The main problem with political debates are the "right and left'. Ask around, there is hardly anyone, save for a few here, that are truly "right" or "left". The problem is the middle (almost all of us) let those polarized assholes control everything.

Most people think or want the following, in no semblance of order:

1.) Healthcare for everyone.
2.) Term limits, desperately.
3.) We need to keep corporations out of gov't.
4.) We need to control Pacs/lobbyists big time.
5.) Tort reform.
6.) Immigration reform to a degree but not destroy the spirit of our country which was founded on immigration and the US as a haven for your tired and poor.
7.) Help small business's, the real area of employment and growth. You know the backbone of this country.
8.) Better Education.


My apologies for missing 10-15 other important idea's, it was just a few main idea's to get the point across. Notice that list doesn't include the numerous red herring arguments that no one gives 3 shits about and yet control the airtime given to political pundits: abortion, gay marriage. Somehow those are used to vet Supreme Court justice's. Our counrty is freaking retarded and mired in nothing more then a polarized political system that is going to eventually implode on itself ( I don't mean it in a Martial Law, Anarchistic way).......I sure hope it does.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2014, 09:12:26 AM
(I don't mean it in a Marshall Law, Anarchistic way)

(http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/2900000/Marshall-how-i-met-your-mother-2960633-1280-1024.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on July 16, 2014, 09:20:34 AM
Ugh sorry about that....... my bad I do know the difference, brain fart especially when a boss is looking over my shoulder with all the typing......



Martial Law, lol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2014, 09:31:31 AM
Ugh sorry about that....... my bad I do know the difference, brain fart especially when a boss is looking over my shoulder with all the typing......

Martial Law, lol.

It's OK, the rest of the post has me on the Puck for President bandwagon. BRB, starting a super PAC.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 16, 2014, 09:39:56 AM
The main problem with political debates are the "right and left'. Ask around, there is hardly anyone, save for a few here, that are truly "right" or "left". The problem is the middle (almost all of us) let those polarized assholes control everything.

Most people think or want the following, in no semblance of order:

1.) Healthcare for everyone.
2.) Term limits, desperately.
3.) We need to keep corporations out of gov't.
4.) We need to control Pacs/lobbyists big time.
5.) Tort reform.
6.) Immigration reform to a degree but not destroy the spirit of our country which was founded on immigration and the US as a haven for your tired and poor.
7.) Help small business's, the real area of employment and growth. You know the backbone of this country.
8.) Better Education.


My apologies for missing 10-15 other important idea's, it was just a few main idea's to get the point across. Notice that list doesn't include the numerous red herring arguments that no one gives 3 shits about and yet control the airtime given to political pundits: abortion, gay marriage. Somehow those are used to vet Supreme Court justice's. Our counrty is freaking retarded and mired in nothing more then a polarized political system that is going to eventually implode on itself ( I don't mean it in a Martial Law, Anarchistic way).......I sure hope it does.

June 16th, mark the day. It was when Puck decided to make his one really good post for the year.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on July 16, 2014, 09:47:10 AM
June 16th, mark the day. It was when Puck decided to make his one really good post for the year.

It's July but why quibble.

(http://i.imgur.com/6qBHT.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2014, 09:52:04 AM
It's July but why quibble.

(http://i.imgur.com/6qBHT.gif)

It's June in the metric system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 16, 2014, 10:04:01 AM
It's OK, the rest of the post has me on the Puck for President bandwagon. BRB, starting a super PAC.

"Big funbags and donuts for everyone!"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 16, 2014, 10:14:00 AM
I think this was closer to the go-to number:
I  was basing it off of when the 33% federal income tax rate kicks in which is 167k for individuals and closer to 200 for married couples.

It's a hefty jump from under 78k which is 25%
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2014, 10:16:01 AM
This all reminds me of a stupid post from back in the tgg days before the 2008 election.

Someone said their wife's friend had to quit her job because they couldn't afford to keep paying the taxes on her income.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 16, 2014, 10:18:52 AM
This all reminds me of a stupid post from back in the tgg days before the 2008 election.

Someone said their wife's friend had to quit her job because they couldn't afford to keep paying the taxes on her income.
Most people have zero idea how taxes work

I can't even begin to tell you how many freaking retarded people told me they shouldn't work overtime, because overtime has special taxes that are so high that makes it not worth it at all.

(and I don't think you were implying it with your comment, but just in case. I understand how progressive income tax works)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on July 16, 2014, 10:27:54 AM
This all reminds me of a stupid post from back in the tgg days before the 2008 election.

Someone said their wife's friend had to quit her job because they couldn't afford to keep paying the taxes on her income.

Was it a business? Sometimes they have lump sum taxes and if you're cash poor.......meaning he may have explained it very poorly. Surely he can't be that dumb.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2014, 10:32:10 AM
Wasn't directed at you, it was just a funny memory.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on July 16, 2014, 11:30:09 AM

Kind of off topic, but do you know a lot of people who are "spiritual but not religious"?

I'd say I know more people who are spiritual but not religious than people who are religious.  Unless I include people I grew up with.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 16, 2014, 11:39:25 AM
people who are spiritual but not religious

AKA hedging their bets.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on July 16, 2014, 12:09:23 PM
All of you under the age of 30: you're stupid and you don't know what you're talking about. (http://www.theatlantic.com/politics/archive/2014/07/millennials-economics-voting-clueless-kids-these-days/374427/)

Quote
You get the sense, reading the Reason Foundation and Pew studies, that a savvy pollster could trick a young person into supporting basically any economic policy in the world with the right combination of triggers. Conservative and liberal partisans can cherry-pick this survey to paint Millennials as whatever ideology they want.

This is definitely true, and it makes me really wonder about the future of domestic economic policies. I feel like there is really no firm ideology or even basic understanding about how the global economy works, and the populace is just so incredibly malleable on issues of wealth that political parties are able to dictate to constituents what kind of economic policy to support rather than politicians reacting to a generally well-informed electorate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on July 16, 2014, 12:14:25 PM
Someone said their wife's friend had to quit her job because they couldn't afford to keep paying the taxes on her income.

(http://media.tumblr.com/3aaf55e2e279f3e0ffbd704d53bfe786/tumblr_inline_n8q5l08b5l1sbfyb2.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 16, 2014, 12:19:19 PM
There was a great John Oliver quote in the last few days where he basically summed up the thought process of people not calling out politicians for allowing corporate America and the super wealthy to run roughshod over them. It was something along the lines of "I know that the way the system is designed is to ensure that people in my position find it next to impossible to ascend to the level of the wealthy, which is why it's going to be so awesome for me when I get there".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 16, 2014, 02:34:23 PM
I'd say I know more people who are spiritual but not religious than people who are religious.  Unless I include people I grew up with.
Yeah I think there's a ton of "spiritual"  yoga tree hugging hippies out there who don't believe in religion or anything. But are into all the magical chii spiritual bullshit.

Though I'm not sure if you'd define all that as either spiritual or full blown freaking retarded
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on July 16, 2014, 03:50:32 PM

Yeah I think there's a ton of "spiritual"  yoga tree hugging hippies out there who don't believe in religion or anything. But are into all the magical chii spiritual bullshit.

Though I'm not sure if you'd define all that as either spiritual or full blown freaking retarded

No, not really.  Plenty of yoga people and people who eat organic and healthy ad all that, but I don't know more than a couple people I'd call hippies, and about the same number who believe in "magical chi spiritual bullshit."

Most people just use the term to say "I'm a good person who doesn't want the stigma of the word atheist" or are agnostic and it's a nice way if saying it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 16, 2014, 03:52:05 PM
I tend to read it as "I'm inclined to believe in something, but I have no use for organised religion". Which is, I think, an entirely rational and reasonable position to take.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2014, 04:00:11 PM
Most people just use the term to say "I'm a good person who doesn't want the stigma of the word atheist" or are agnostic and it's a nice way if saying it.

Anyone who self-identifies as spiritual isn't an atheist. Or doesn't understand what words mean.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 16, 2014, 04:04:01 PM
Anyone who self-identifies as spiritual isn't an atheist. Or doesn't understand what words mean.
Can you not belive in spirits and souls yet belive there is no God/gods ?

Spirituality is an irrational belief, as is religion.

So why not have two irrational beliefs?

It's not like logic needs apply
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2014, 04:13:40 PM
Can you not belive in spirits and souls yet belive there is no God/gods ?

Spirituality is an irrational belief, as is religion.

So why not have two irrational beliefs?

It's not like logic needs apply

Chances are if you asked a "spiritual" person if they believe in a god they'd be uncomfortable saying no. At least not without a qualifier like "not in the traditional sense".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on July 16, 2014, 04:25:22 PM

Anyone who self-identifies as spiritual isn't an atheist. Or doesn't understand what words mean.

Or they find it to be a nice way of avoiding further discussion.  Most of them tell you they believe in a deep interconnectedness to nature, but no supreme being.  Spiritual has been changed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on July 16, 2014, 04:29:38 PM

I tend to read it as "I'm inclined to believe in something, but I have no use for organised religion". Which is, I think, an entirely rational and reasonable position to take.

That's probably the most apt definition.  I'd say most people who use the term are agnostic rather than atheist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2014, 04:30:11 PM
That's probably the most apt definition.  I'd say most people who use the term are agnostic rather than atheist.

So they're agnostic atheists then.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on July 16, 2014, 04:44:55 PM
This is pretty damn funny.

http://latino.foxnews.com/latino/politics/2014/07/16/tea-party-candidate-protesters-besiege-bus-ymca-campers-mistaken-for-migrant/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on July 16, 2014, 04:45:14 PM
yet belive there is no God/gods ?

How can you not believe in god?  You post on this forum and know that I exist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 16, 2014, 04:46:29 PM
How can you not believe in god?  You post on this forum and know that I exist.

dcm's presence on this forum is incontrovertible proof that there is no god.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on July 16, 2014, 04:47:01 PM
dcm's presence on this forum is incontrovertible proof that there is no god.

hahaha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2014, 04:51:11 PM
How can you not believe in god?  You post on this forum and know that I exist.
dcm's presence on this forum is incontrovertible proof that there is no god.

Matter and anti-matter
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on July 16, 2014, 05:09:38 PM
dcm's presence on this forum is incontrovertible proof that there is no god.

5 honks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on July 16, 2014, 05:17:10 PM

So they're agnostic atheists then.

And now you get why they use vague statements to describe themselves...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2014, 05:40:01 PM
And now you get why they use vague statements to describe themselves...

No, because I wouldn't needle most people about it. If they're atheists and don't use the word, they're pussies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 30, 2014, 08:55:28 AM
What are you doing?

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-28565772

Is it even legal to sue the President?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on July 30, 2014, 09:12:25 AM
Thank god we have the Tea Party watching our backs, giving us great governance.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 30, 2014, 09:13:19 AM
I really hate it when some Republicans pull excrement like this. They watch the Democrats complain endlessly about every single decision Bush made for 8 years. Can one party just take the fuckn high road for once?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 30, 2014, 09:40:09 AM
I really hate it when some Republicans pull excrement like this. They watch the Democrats complain endlessly about every single decision Bush made for 8 years. Can one party just take the fuckn high road for once?

No
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on July 30, 2014, 09:45:11 AM
I really hate it when some Republicans pull excrement like this. They watch the Democrats complain endlessly about every single decision Bush made for 8 years. Can one party just take the fuckn high road for once?
No

Pretty much
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 29, 2014, 10:56:15 AM
This is a moderately interesting chart.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2014/08/29/3476349/does-your-church-dictate-your-politics/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 29, 2014, 11:02:12 AM

This is a moderately interesting chart.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2014/08/29/3476349/does-your-church-dictate-your-politics/

That chart kind of proves that religion plays no part in small vs big government, but does play a part in that whole morality thing. Black religious conservatives will always vote democrat because of the social service thing, even though they align with hard core conservatives on almost everything else.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 29, 2014, 11:03:22 AM
This is a moderately interesting chart.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2014/08/29/3476349/does-your-church-dictate-your-politics/

Atheist, raised United Methodist, but I fall pretty much right in that Agnostic circle.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 29, 2014, 11:03:41 AM
This is a moderately interesting chart.

http://thinkprogress.org/election/2014/08/29/3476349/does-your-church-dictate-your-politics/
I  only briefly skimmed it

But I don't think church dictates anything

Gender, race religion, and socioeconomic status are all huge factors.

Wasn't interested enough to delve further into their methodologies though I saw some stuff where they mentioned like (black)  in brackets.

So I'm assuming maybe they included race?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 29, 2014, 11:06:28 AM
That chart kind of proves that religion plays no part in small vs big government, but does play a part in that whole morality thing. Black religious conservatives will always vote democrat because of the social service thing, even though they align with hard core conservatives on almost everything else.

Hence California in 2008
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 29, 2014, 11:12:21 AM
I  only briefly skimmed it

But I don't think church dictates anything

Gender, race religion, and socioeconomic status are all huge factors.

Wasn't interested enough to delve further into their methodologies though I saw some stuff where they mentioned like (black)  in brackets.

So I'm assuming maybe they included race?

There are some strong correlations between the churches on the chart and race/economics.

Catholicism probably has the greatest cross-section of demographics which is why it's sitting right in the middle.

The churches in the corners of the chart are a lot easier to peg.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on August 30, 2014, 09:32:02 AM
Cable giants want municipal broadband blocked. (http://www.theguardian.com/business/2014/aug/29/us-telecoms-fcc-block-high-speed-internet-chattanooga)

Quote
“The success of public broadband is a mixed record, with numerous examples of failures,” USTelecom said in a blog post. “With state taxpayers on the financial hook when a municipal broadband network goes under, it is entirely reasonable for state legislatures to be cautious in limiting or even prohibiting that activity.”

WHO THE freak ARE YOU KIDDING
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 23, 2014, 09:51:08 AM
I really wish the climate change marchers didn't make it so easy for smug retards to spout off.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 23, 2014, 11:19:28 AM
I really wish the climate change marchers didn't make it so easy for smug retards to spout off.
It's freaking cold outside. I could use some global warming
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 23, 2014, 03:56:30 PM

I really wish the climate change marchers didn't make it so easy for smug retards to spout off.

The climate change "movement" has been hijacked by anti-capitalists and anarchists who use it as an excuse to spout off against our way of life. The problem I have with them is that they've all of a sudden demonize people for just living a normal life. Drive to work? freak you, you're just making it worse. excrement like that.

Obviously certain measures would be great for the environment but all the finger pointing and talk about your bullshit "carbon footprint" just makes them assholes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 07, 2014, 08:48:02 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/KrM0bcC.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 07, 2014, 08:55:31 AM
The country just needs to be patient. I was very much anti gay marriage up until a few years ago. And not for any religious reason either. Some people just consider it a major change in the social order, and more would support if proponents didn't constantly pontificate about what a horrible person you are if you aren't 100pct on board.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 07, 2014, 08:57:58 AM
The country just needs to be patient. I was very much anti gay marriage up until an asian man-lady massaged my boy parts last night. And not for any religious reason either. Some people just consider it a major change in the social order, and more would support if proponents didn't constantly pontificate about what a horrible person you are if you aren't 100pct on board.

fyp.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 07, 2014, 09:00:01 AM
The country just needs to be patient. I was very much anti gay marriage up until a few years ago. And not for any religious reason either. Some people just consider it a major change in the social order, and more would support if proponents didn't constantly pontificate about what a horrible person you are if you aren't 100pct on board.

How many people actually think "I'm OK with same sex marriage but I won't support it because people who do are annoying"?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on October 07, 2014, 09:05:02 AM
How many people actually think "I'm OK with same sex marriage but I won't support it because people who do are annoying"?

I think the people that don't are more annoying.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 07, 2014, 09:05:28 AM
I think the people that don't are more annoying.

They are worse than the people who don't have an opinion on where to eat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 07, 2014, 09:07:38 AM

fyp.

I should've seen this coming.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on October 07, 2014, 09:36:52 AM
How many people actually think "I'm OK with same sex marriage but I won't support it because people who do are annoying"?

I think it's more like, "Oh, man, I am being attacked for being uncomfortable with gay marriage? freak you, and freak gay marriage."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 07, 2014, 09:38:45 AM
I think it's more like, "Oh, man, I am being attacked for being uncomfortable with gay marriage? freak you, and freak gay marriage."

Hopefully anyone that weak minded doesn't vote.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on October 07, 2014, 01:54:24 PM
I love seeing two guys kiss
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 07, 2014, 02:07:09 PM
Hopefully anyone that weak minded doesn't vote.
Have you seen politics the last 12+ years?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 07, 2014, 02:11:28 PM
Have you seen politics the last 12+ years?

(http://i0.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/newsfeed/000/164/362/1313777142002.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 07, 2014, 09:21:31 PM
http://youtu.be/tTCXR8uaCHg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on October 07, 2014, 09:35:10 PM
The country just needs to be patient. I was very much anti gay marriage up until a few years ago. And not for any religious reason either. Some people just consider it a major change in the social order, and more would support if proponents didn't constantly pontificate about what a horrible person you are if you aren't 100pct on board.

Uh, the exact opposite is also true.  I've had people ask me how I can possibly live with myself because I support gay marriage.  I've had others tell me I'm going to hell.  I've had others tell me I must be gay myself.  Like most people, you're annoyed more by the people who disagree with you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on October 07, 2014, 09:36:41 PM
The climate change "movement" has been hijacked by anti-capitalists and anarchists who use it as an excuse to spout off against our way of life. The problem I have with them is that they've all of a sudden demonize people for just living a normal life. Drive to work? freak you, you're just making it worse. excrement like that.

Obviously certain measures would be great for the environment but all the finger pointing and talk about your bullshit "carbon footprint" just makes them assholes.

Case in point.  Don't agree with me?  Your supporters must be a bunch of nutjobs and anti-Americans.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on November 04, 2014, 11:48:39 PM
So apparently the country loves Republicans again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 05, 2014, 06:40:33 AM
Didn't the inverse of this happen during Bush's last 2 years?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on November 05, 2014, 09:05:41 AM
Didn't the inverse of this happen during Bush's last 2 years?

Yes, and when nothing happens under the new Republican congress, it'll likely swing back.  And forth.  And back.  And forth.  Pooping forever.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on November 05, 2014, 09:07:39 AM
Intense Tommy lost his bid for governor of California.  No surprise given the R next to his name, but still a shame.  I personally think he'd have been great for the state.

(http://images.bwbx.io/cms/2014-05-28/feat_kashkari23__01__970.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 05, 2014, 09:15:24 AM
I will never understand why lower to lower middle class white people vote against themselves.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on November 05, 2014, 09:36:28 AM
I will never understand why lower to lower middle class white people vote against themselves.

Some of them vote against themselves economically, but so do high income people.  A lot of them value social issues more, or they believe firmly that there's a lower group beneath them and that they need to prove themselves better.  It's no different from the poor whites who proudly defended slavery despite the fact none of them could ever hope to own a slave.  There's a lot of pride at stake.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2014, 09:37:15 AM
Obama is officially the black Bush

He single handedly destroyed his party,  and pretty much every race was lost because they were connected to him.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2014, 09:38:43 AM
I will never understand why lower to lower middle class white people vote against themselves.
Probably because the other party values lower class people of color  more than them.

They're fucked on the left, and fucked on the right
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on November 05, 2014, 10:27:15 AM
The two party system does not work. Either party simply doesn't have the people's best interest at stake. Their decisions are going to be in favor of whoever donating the most money.

Next election we will be voting democrat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2014, 10:31:39 AM
The two party system does not work. Either party simply doesn't have the people's best interest at stake. Their decisions are going to be in favor of whoever donating the most money.

Next election we will be voting democrat.
Other systems don't work either.

People are stupid, selfish, lazy, and ignorant at best

It's relatively improbable Democrats take power next election.

Obama is the black Bush, it could take a good 6-8 years before the pendulum swings back. Instead well watch Obamacare slowly die and get dismantled
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 05, 2014, 10:36:07 AM
Other systems don't work either.

People are stupid, selfish, lazy, and ignorant at best

It's relatively improbable Democrats take power next election.

Obama is the black Bush, it could take a good 6-8 years before the pendulum swings back. Instead well watch Obamacare slowly die and get dismantled

Then maybe we'll get single payer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2014, 10:38:42 AM
Then maybe we'll get single payer.
People weren't happy about Obamacare being far left. As it fails and gets dismantled (and this recent election shows people don't support it) you think suddenly they're gonna say maybe let's go even further left?

Democrats are gonna be extra cautious about messing around with healthcare too much in the immediate near future
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 05, 2014, 10:39:57 AM
People weren't happy about Obamacare being far left. As it fails and gets dismantled (and this recent election shows people don't support it) you think suddenly they're gonna say maybe let's go even further left?

Democrats are gonna be extra cautious about messing around with healthcare too much in the immediate near future

ACA was a turd, single payer actually has a shot at resolving serious issues with the healthcare system, which is currently a cruel joke.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2014, 10:41:33 AM
ACA was a turd, single payer actually has a shot at resolving serious issues with the healthcare system, which is currently a cruel joke.
But whose going to trust the people who developed and forced that turd on the American people, and give them the power to completley revamp our healthcare system yet again?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 05, 2014, 10:51:18 AM
ACA was a turd, single payer actually has a shot at resolving serious issues with the healthcare system, which is currently a cruel joke.

You only think that because you don't work hard enough. If you worked harder you'd get paid more and then you could buy all the healthcare you want. You only have yourself to blame because you're lazy and therefore undeserving of the good healthcare.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on November 05, 2014, 11:07:15 AM
Probably because the other party values lower class people of color  more than them.

They're fucked on the left, and fucked on the right

Aaaaand there's the attitude I'm talking about.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 05, 2014, 11:37:00 AM
You only think that because you don't work hard enough. If you worked harder you'd get paid more and then you could buy all the healthcare you want. You only have yourself to blame because you're lazy and therefore undeserving of the good healthcare.

I saw a good tweet yesterday. I don't recall the exact wording but it was to the effect of: "Voting more will change politics is the civic equivalent of if the poor worked harder they'd be rich!"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 05, 2014, 11:50:34 AM
I saw a good tweet yesterday. I don't recall the exact wording but it was to the effect of: "Voting more will change politics is the civic equivalent of if the poor worked harder they'd be rich!"

BTW what do you think of our fellow Stanner? I kind of soured on him in the last year or so, even though I align with him on most issues.

I didn't vote yesterday for several reasons, but I would have written in Zephyr Teachout for Governor.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 05, 2014, 12:28:14 PM
BTW what do you think of our fellow Stanner? I kind of soured on him in the last year or so, even though I align with him on most issues.

I didn't vote yesterday for several reasons, but I would have written in Zephyr Teachout for Governor.

I don't have an issue with Cuomo. NY Governor is one of the least important governmental positions on my radar. It's wholly consumed with making the state happy, not the city. I'm always more interested in the NYC Mayor, who I cannot stand.

I literally know nothing about Teachout except for angry-at-Cuomo tweets one of my follows loves to RT. I was quite the uninformed voter this year.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2014, 12:55:12 PM
Aaaaand there's the attitude I'm talking about.
You have kids right?

I'm assuming they're too young for this, but have you started applying for colleges with them?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 05, 2014, 02:03:55 PM
Some of them vote against themselves economically, but so do high income people.  A lot of them value social issues more, or they believe firmly that there's a lower group beneath them and that they need to prove themselves better.  It's no different from the poor whites who proudly defended slavery despite the fact none of them could ever hope to own a slave.  There's a lot of pride at stake.

High income people have that choice.  The poor whites who defended slavery were just dumb.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on November 05, 2014, 03:28:23 PM

You have kids right?

I'm assuming they're too young for this, but have you started applying for colleges with them?

Yes, they're too young, and yes we just sent off their early decision apps on the 1st.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 11, 2014, 09:40:34 AM
http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2014/11/10/aca-architect-the-stupidity-of-the-american-voter-led-us-to-hide-obamacares-tax-hikes-and-subsidies-from-the-public/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 18, 2014, 11:25:26 AM
Stupid kids. If only they realized that if they work harder they wouldn't be in their situation.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/Homelessness-hits-one-in-30-US-children/ar-BBekEKV?ocid=ansnewsafp11 (http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/Homelessness-hits-one-in-30-US-children/ar-BBekEKV?ocid=ansnewsafp11)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 12:48:07 AM
How the hell did that Keystone bill die? It's funny how Republican congressmen get a lot of crap, but the other side managed to convince their constituents that a routine pipeline project like this would be a bad idea?

Fuehrer proof that both sides will take the opposite position on almost anything, regardless whether it's edit or wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 21, 2014, 07:09:10 AM
How the hell did that Keystone bill die? It's funny how Republican congressmen get a lot of crap, but the other side managed to convince their constituents that a routine pipeline project like this would be a bad idea?

Fuehrer proof that both sides will take the opposite position on almost anything, regardless whether it's edit or wrong.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Obviously the few who stand to benefit from it didn't buy enough votes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 21, 2014, 08:03:09 AM
Obviously the few who stand to benefit from it didn't buy enough votes.

Yeah, you would think those assholes would learn from their time in strip joints and with the high dollar escorts, make it rain baby, make it rain!

(http://31.media.tumblr.com/d096f3dffca8ec0f4771c0b066b3a7e4/tumblr_mhdalzgBgP1qh01r8o1_500.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 08:08:15 AM

Obviously the few who stand to benefit from it didn't buy enough votes.

The pipeline would generate about $3b in revenue. Also, there are already thousands of miles of pipelines all over the U.S., which by the way is the safest and most efficient way to transport oil. The opposition is just throwing around the environmental BS so they can shoot it down and brag about how they shot down "an environmental disaster waiting to happen." Politics at its worst. There's absolutely no reason to block this pipeline.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 21, 2014, 08:08:59 AM
The pipeline would generate about $3b in revenue.

Yes, for the few who stand to benefit from it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 21, 2014, 08:11:37 AM
Yes, for the few who stand to benefit from it.
Just all the employees who work for the pipeline companies the companies that produce and maintain its equipment, and all the town's where all these people reside.

3b dollars for any economy is a pretty good thing
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 21, 2014, 08:14:56 AM
Just all the employees who work for the pipeline companies the companies that produce and maintain its equipment, and all the town's where all these people reside.

3b dollars for any economy is a pretty good thing

Its effect on local economies and the number of long term jobs being created has been overstated.

Those companies aren't exactly hurting without it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 08:15:06 AM

Yes, for the few who stand to benefit from it.

Do you have any idea how the supply chain in the energy industry even works? The oil and gas industry alone in the U.S. employs close to a million Americans. Not to many that any increase in output and efficiency in transport will lower costs for most.

The idea that only the select few stand to benefit is BS, and I know you're smarter than that.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 21, 2014, 08:16:41 AM
Its effect on local economies and the number of long term jobs being created has been overstated.

Those companies aren't exactly hurting without it.
Look at states or cities that rely on either coal mines or the auto industry.

excrement like this can make or break huge cities.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 08:17:40 AM

Its effect on local economies and the number of long term jobs being created has been overstated.

Those companies aren't exactly hurting without it.

Overstated maybe, but the critics of the pipeline have been wayyyy overstating any potential negatives. Just because people think the benefits "aren't that much" doesn't mean they should be against something that will be funded mostly by the private sector anyway.

It's pretty much like the government telling you that you can't expand your bar to include an outdoor area because it won't be all that beneficial, and it may be noisy for your neighbours.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 21, 2014, 08:17:45 AM
Look at states or cities that rely on either coal mines or the auto industry.

excrement like this can make or break huge cities.

When's the last time you've been to an oil/gas town? I'll wait.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 21, 2014, 08:18:57 AM
When's the last time you've been to an oil/gas town? I'll wait.
When's the last time I went to a coal mining town, or auto industry town?

Just because I don't mumble around some excrement hole towns and cities in the Midwest doesn't mean they don't exist
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 21, 2014, 08:22:34 AM
When's the last time I went to a coal mining town, or auto industry town?

Just because I don't mumble around some excrement hole towns and cities in the Midwest doesn't mean they don't exist

What an awful straw man. I'm not saying they don't exist. I'm saying you don't know excrement about oil/gas towns.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 08:25:23 AM
Forget about the towns, $3b injected into any industry is good for everyone.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 21, 2014, 08:25:24 AM
When's the last time you've been to an oil/gas town? I'll wait.

WTF Badger? Without this pipeline, all the multiple 100 billion dollars of investments in new oil infrastructure and technology like fracking will collapse and die.

Where's your freaking humanity Badger?(http://www.jetoffensive.com/%3D%3D) (http://search.surfcanyon.com/search?f=nrl1&q=billions%20upon&partner=fastestfox)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 08:27:47 AM
The oil will get refined and sold and hit the open market no matter what. The lack of this pipeline won't have an adverse effect on the industry, but it's silly to be against infrastructure improvements just because the industry that stands to benefit is unpopular for some reason. You more than anyone is outspoken against cheap political bullshit. This is a prime example except it's coming from the other side. Going against something for the sake of being against it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 21, 2014, 08:29:05 AM
The oil will get refined and sold and hit the open market no matter what. The lack of this pipeline won't have an adverse effect on the industry, but it's silly to be against infrastructure improvements just because the industry that stands to benefit is unpopular for some reason. You more than anyone is outspoken against cheap political bullshit. This is a prime example except it's coming from the other side. Going against something for the sake of being against it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sure there is an element that will go against anything and everything that said, just because you don't want a particular pipeline doesn't mean you're against the entire universe of oil infrastructure investments.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 08:32:11 AM

Sure there is an element that will go against anything and everything that said, just because you don't want a particular pipeline doesn't mean you're against the entire universe of oil infrastructure investments.

But there's literally no reason to be against a pipeline being built when there are already thousands of miles of pipelines being built. Politicians are playing with the constituents. That's all this is.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 21, 2014, 08:33:21 AM
The oil will get refined and sold and hit the open market no matter what. The lack of this pipeline won't have an adverse effect on the industry, but it's silly to be against infrastructure improvements just because the industry that stands to benefit is unpopular for some reason. You more than anyone is outspoken against cheap political bullshit. This is a prime example except it's coming from the other side. Going against something for the sake of being against it.

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Infrastructure improvements for a bloated industry that we are/should be trying to move past? Just because it makes somebody money doesn't mean we have to do it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on November 21, 2014, 08:34:57 AM
Oh no,  you can't take Canadian oil and make massive profits compared to the Canadian and local Americans meager pay. Oh no, the Canadian land won't be disfigured even more to the benefit of nobody here (at least in the interim).

Sent from my SGH-I317M using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 08:41:26 AM

Infrastructure improvements for a bloated industry that we are/should be trying to move past? Just because it makes somebody money doesn't mean we have to do it.

You do know that the pipeline is entirely publicly funded right? And move past oil? There's more to oil than just gasoline for cars. Thousands of products are made with oil byproducts. It's an important industry that will never go away, and one that we aren't going to move past. Besides, some of the major investors of renewable energy are oil and gas companies, many of whom fund research into it. Mostly for the less sexy renewables like biofuel and hydro, which are far more efficient than solar and wind anyway.

Even if you want to speed up the development of renewables, we shouldn't ask the government for help. Hell, we didn't have to make the horse and carriage illegal for cars to get invented and become the standard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 21, 2014, 08:44:19 AM
You do know that the pipeline is entirely publicly funded right?

You know that's not a selling point, right?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 08:46:50 AM

You know that's not a selling point, right?

So you want to prevent an industry from expanding and making improvements using their own money just because?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 21, 2014, 08:48:41 AM
So you want to prevent an industry from expanding and making improvements using their own money just because?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It's not an industry that I support expansion of.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 08:51:46 AM

It's not an industry that I support expansion of.

So if you don't like smartphones, would it be right to ask the government to prevent Apple from building a factory?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on November 21, 2014, 08:53:21 AM

You do know that the pipeline is entirely publicly funded right? And move past oil? There's more to oil than just gasoline for cars. Thousands of products are made with oil byproducts. It's an important industry that will never go away, and one that we aren't going to move past. Besides, some of the major investors of renewable energy are oil and gas companies, many of whom fund research into it. Mostly for the less sexy renewables like biofuel and hydro, which are far more efficient than solar and wind anyway.

Even if you want to speed up the development of renewables, we shouldn't ask the government for help. Hell, we didn't have to make the horse and carriage illegal for cars to get invented and become the standard.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

The horse and buggy weren't presenting a serious environmental threat.  I'm actually a big fan of the pipeline, just not on its own.  I want to see the pipeline as part of a package.  Invest heavily in new resources and use the pipeline as a way to bridge the gap between our current dependence on foreign oil and a future in which oil consumption is drastically reduced.  We aren't ready for that leap, and the pipeline would be a big benefit.  I just think it's asinine to keep supporting the oil industry as though it's perfectly benign.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 21, 2014, 08:55:32 AM
The horse and buggy weren't presenting a serious environmental threat.  I'm actually a big fan of the pipeline, just not on its own.  I want to see the pipeline as part of a package.  Invest heavily in new resources and use the pipeline as a way to bridge the gap between our current dependence on foreign oil and a future in which oil consumption is drastically reduced.  We aren't ready for that leap, and the pipeline would be a big benefit.  I just think it's asinine to keep supporting the oil industry as though it's perfectly benign.

Actually the US is supposed to be oil independent with in the next year. Meaning our oil output will match or exceed our oil usage shortly if it hasn't already.

My biggest problem is that the assholes in congress will allow the industry to export, which to me is patently stupid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 21, 2014, 09:00:41 AM
So if you don't like smartphones, would it be right to ask the government to prevent Apple from building a factory?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Don't be ridiculous.

Apple doesn't want to pay American factory labor.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 21, 2014, 09:02:21 AM
The horse and buggy weren't presenting a serious environmental threat.  I'm actually a big fan of the pipeline, just not on its own.  I want to see the pipeline as part of a package.  Invest heavily in new resources and use the pipeline as a way to bridge the gap between our current dependence on foreign oil and a future in which oil consumption is drastically reduced.  We aren't ready for that leap, and the pipeline would be a big benefit.  I just think it's asinine to keep supporting the oil industry as though it's perfectly benign.
Actually the US is supposed to be oil independent with in the next year. Meaning our oil output will match or exceed our oil usage shortly if it hasn't already.

My biggest problem is that the assholes in congress will allow the industry to export, which to me is patently stupid.

But it'll make money, for somebody. Why do you hate money?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 09:05:15 AM

The horse and buggy weren't presenting a serious environmental threat.  I'm actually a big fan of the pipeline, just not on its own.  I want to see the pipeline as part of a package.  Invest heavily in new resources and use the pipeline as a way to bridge the gap between our current dependence on foreign oil and a future in which oil consumption is drastically reduced.  We aren't ready for that leap, and the pipeline would be a big benefit.  I just think it's asinine to keep supporting the oil industry as though it's perfectly benign.

What new resources? And with respect to lowering dependence on foreign oil, first of all oil is bought and sold in the open market, so no one buys Saudi oil, Iraqi oil, etc. It's like any other commodity. Besides, increasing output in North America will lessen the share of output from re ME, lessening it's importance. Isn't that what we'd want?

I'm not saying that the industry is perfect, but it does get a lot of unfair criticism. People don't respect just how dependent we all are on the industry, and not just for energy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 21, 2014, 09:07:54 AM
Actually the US is supposed to be oil independent with in the next year. Meaning our oil output will match or exceed our oil usage shortly if it hasn't already.

My biggest problem is that the assholes in congress will allow the industry to export, which to me is patently stupid.


But it'll make money, for somebody. Why do you hate money?

We should export the hell out of it and then get right back into the cycle of shoveling gobs of money to regions/countries of the world that hate us. That's really the American way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 09:08:46 AM


My biggest problem is that the assholes in congress will allow the industry to export, which to me is patently stupid.

What do you mean "allow the industry to export"?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 21, 2014, 09:13:43 AM
It sure would be nice if we could further develop collection from energy sources that don't freak up everything.  That big bright thing in the sky showers us with exponentially more clean energy than we could ever use.  Someday after I'm dead, we'll be able to harness it and not need anything else.  But we have to help people trying to do that and get out of the way.  Even if it isn't done perfectly yet, it's about going in that direction.  There is little downside to developing renewable resources unless you make money off one that isn't renewable.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 09:23:56 AM

It sure would be nice if we could further develop collection from energy sources that don't freak up everything.  That big bright thing in the sky showers us with exponentially more clean energy than we could ever use.  Someday after I'm dead, we'll be able to harness it and not need anything else.  But we have to help people trying to do that and get out of the way.  Even if it isn't done perfectly yet, it's about going in that direction.  There is little downside to developing renewable resources unless you make money off one that isn't renewable.

Private money is already flowing through renewables. Wind is completely inefficient and expensive, we still don't know how to store solar energy effectively. Solar power can power your home during the day, but not in the evening when most people are home anyway. But anyway, it's being invested in. As of today outfitting your roof with solar panels will cost about $20k and will take about 15 years in energy savings just for you to break even. Things will improve, but it will take time, and won't need taxpayer money to get there. Besides, renewable energy is heavily subsidised anyway. Look what happened to some of the companies that went belly up after  haemorrhaging millions of taxpayer money.

Again, billions of private money is already being invested yearly in biofuels and hydro/wave/tidal, which is way more efficient.

If there's money to be made, especially in energy, people will invest in it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 21, 2014, 09:32:29 AM
Private money is already flowing through renewables. Wind is completely inefficient and expensive, we still don't know how to store solar energy effectively. Solar power can power your home during the day, but not in the evening when most people are home anyway. But anyway, it's being invested in. As of today outfitting your roof with solar panels will cost about $20k and will take about 15 years in energy savings just for you to break even. Things will improve, but it will take time, and won't need taxpayer money to get there. Besides, renewable energy is heavily subsidised anyway. Look what happened to some of the companies that went belly up after  haemorrhaging millions of taxpayer money.

Again, billions of private money is already being invested yearly in biofuels and hydro/wave/tidal, which is way more efficient.

If there's money to be made, especially in energy, people will invest in it.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
You seem to be speaking strictly from a business perspective.  I'm speaking from an environmental also.  Oil is a better business decision right now.  That doesn't make it right.  I'm not saying we need to massively dump government money into renewables.  Just stop rewarding going backwards.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 21, 2014, 09:38:21 AM
What do you mean "allow the industry to export"?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

As it stands right now, the industry has strict guidelines about exporting, like the fact they can not or can't very easily at all. That's simply a function of the country wanting to keep the petroleum we produce in house to be captured sort of speak. This is smart policy, especially considering for decades (since at least WW2) we were in a huge deficit with regard to the production/usage dynamic and we are already beholden to countries and political entities that freaking hate us.

Fast forward to today, we are now producing more petroleum then we are using. How long will it last? How long can it last? Nobody knows the freaking answer. But sure as the sun rises in the east the petroleum industry is getting every congressman's rooster sucked in the hope they can get rid of the onerous laws that make exporting of petroleum difficult. They were already on this last year in anticipation.

I say freak that, this country spent decades getting derriere fucked every which way it could by OPEC/Russia and all the countries in the assholes of the world that hate us. So the very day our tenuous new oil production exceeds usage, we start exporting? freak that freak that freak that.

 Build up stockpiles and reserves and do not allow exporting. Nobody knows how long this new revolution in production will last. For fracking to be profitable oil needs to be north of 90 bucks a barrel and that's the bear minimum. What happens if we have a prolonged slump in oil prices? Then fracking will be shelved and oil production will go down as will discovery and research into new techniques..................

Then you know what Tommy? We are back where the freak we started, having to blow the shieks in the middle east, get in bed with dictators like Chavez or Putin. So no we should not allow exporting, it's freaking patently freaking stupid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on November 21, 2014, 09:40:30 AM

What new resources? And with respect to lowering dependence on foreign oil, first of all oil is bought and sold in the open market, so no one buys Saudi oil, Iraqi oil, etc. It's like any other commodity. Besides, increasing output in North America will lessen the share of output from re ME, lessening it's importance. Isn't that what we'd want?

I'm not saying that the industry is perfect, but it does get a lot of unfair criticism. People don't respect just how dependent we all are on the industry, and not just for energy.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Did you not read what I said?  It doesn't sound like it when you argue in support of one of my points.

Facets of a new energy plan need to be regionally appropriate and tailored.  Wind in the plains, solar in the Southwest, algae based biofuel in regions with high water area (don't get me started on anti-nuclear power idiots).  Like I said, the pipeline is great if it bridges the gap.  It's not if we build it simply to extend the length of time the oil industry can profit hand over fist.  Get a better energy plan in place so oil can supplement rather than dominate energy production and I'm hugely supportive.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on November 21, 2014, 09:41:47 AM

You seem to be speaking strictly from a business perspective.  I'm speaking from an environmental also.  Oil is a better business decision right now.  That doesn't make it right.  I'm not saying we need to massively dump government money into renewables.  Just stop rewarding going backwards.

No, dude.  freak the habitability of the planet.  All that matters is money right now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 09:56:19 AM

As it stands right now, the industry has strict guidelines about exporting, like the fact they can not or can't very easily at all. That's simply a function of the country wanting to keep the petroleum we produce in house to be captured sort of speak. This is smart policy, especially considering for decades (since at least WW2) we were in a huge deficit with regard to the production/usage dynamic and we are already beholden to countries and political entities that freaking hate us.

Fast forward to today, we are now producing more petroleum then we are using. How long will it last? How long can it last? Nobody knows the freaking answer. But sure as the sun rises in the east the petroleum industry is getting every congressman's rooster sucked in the hope they can get rid of the onerous laws that make exporting of petroleum difficult. They were already on this last year in anticipation.

I say freak that, this country spent decades getting derriere fucked every which way it could by OPEC/Russia and all the countries in the assholes of the world that hate us. So the very day our tenuous new oil production exceeds usage, we start exporting? freak that freak that freak that.

 Build up stockpiles and reserves and do not allow exporting. Nobody knows how long this new revolution in production will last. For fracking to be profitable oil needs to be north of 90 bucks a barrel and that's the bear minimum. What happens if we have a prolonged slump in oil prices? Then fracking will be shelved and oil production will go down as will discovery and research into new techniques..................

Then you know what Tommy? We are back where the freak we started, having to blow the shieks in the middle east, get in bed with dictators like Chavez or Putin. So no we should not allow exporting, it's freaking patently freaking stupid.

The ban is only on crude oil exports. The U.S. is still one of the top exporters of refined oil and oil products in the world. Oil refineries in the US just buy crude oil cheaply, process it, then export the finished product. Allowing crude oil to be exported would be way more beneficial to the economy as well as shore up exploitation here that isn't as profitable if you can't export what you drill.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 09:57:48 AM

Did you not read what I said?  It doesn't sound like it when you argue in support of one of my points.

Facets of a new energy plan need to be regionally appropriate and tailored.  Wind in the plains, solar in the Southwest, algae based biofuel in regions with high water area (don't get me started on anti-nuclear power idiots).  Like I said, the pipeline is great if it bridges the gap.  It's not if we build it simply to extend the length of time the oil industry can profit hand over fist.  Get a better energy plan in place so oil can supplement rather than dominate energy production and I'm hugely supportive.

How can a pipeline bridge the gap between oil/gas and new energy?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 21, 2014, 10:04:05 AM
The ban is only on crude oil exports. The U.S. is still one of the top exporters of refined oil and oil products in the world. Oil refineries in the US just buy crude oil cheaply, process it, then export the finished product. Allowing crude oil to be exported would be way more beneficial to the economy as well as shore up exploitation here that isn't as profitable if you can't export what you drill.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I can see we wont agree on this and I am done. Allowing crude doesn't benefit this country one bit, it benefits, Exxon, BP, Chevron but 99.9% of the people of this country derive or will derive zero benefit from this. All it does is allow those companies to essentially arbitrage oil.

Edit: Allowing the export of refined products is fine. I was speaking of unrefined oil. I worded my response poorly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 21, 2014, 10:10:30 AM

I can see we wont agree on this and I am done. Allowing crude doesn't benefit this country one bit, it benefits, Exxon, BP, Chevron but 99.9% of the people of this country derive or will derive zero benefit from this. All it does is allow those companies to essentially arbitrage oil.

Agree on what? Where do you think the crude is going? They're not just sticking it in the ground. It has to be sold to refineries, and right now the law is making those refineries rich because they can buy crude oil very cheap, and don't have to import. Those refineries, by the way, are owned by companies like Exxon, BP,  Chevron. They're making their money regardless.

Lifting the ban would promote more production here, which would lessen the ME's influence on the market.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 21, 2014, 10:23:25 AM
Agree on what? Where do you think the crude is going? They're not just sticking it in the ground. It has to be sold to refineries, and right now the law is making those refineries rich because they can buy crude oil very cheap, and don't have to import. Those refineries, by the way, are owned by companies like Exxon, BP,  Chevron. They're making their money regardless.

Lifting the ban would promote more production here, which would lessen the ME's influence on the market.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Well it seems to me having the ban in place worked just fine in getting production up. With the ban in place the US's production ramped up just fine. With net neutral oil production and usage, the ME would have zero influence on this country. There are also the strategic reserves, so not all oil is refined and shipped.

Also Exxon and Chevron etc all have vast production facilities and agreements in other countries. They don't need to export US originated oil. They can use or do whatever they want with oil produced from offshore sources. It's not like the oil produced here is their only source or their main source, it ain't.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 21, 2014, 10:29:46 AM
Norway exports nearly all of it's oil and uses the profits towards clean energy.  Kind of a weird dynamic there.  Using oil profits to promote not using oil.

http://freakonomics.com/2014/10/16/how-can-tiny-norway-afford-to-buy-so-many-teslas-a-new-freakonomics-radio-podcast/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 21, 2014, 10:29:56 AM
So if you don't like smartphones, would it be right to ask the government to prevent Apple from building a factory?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Badger already got to the punch line on this one, so I will make a serious comment.

This argument is terrible Tommy.  If a company wanted to build on private and Indian land without the consent of those land owners, you are damn right the government should be involved.

Add to that the fact that keystone would pass directly over the largest aquifer in the US, and environmentalists have all the right in the world to get their panties in a bunch.

The jobs argument is also a joke.  Once the pipeline is built their will only be a skeleton crew left to monitor it.  At that point all of the money will be going to the oil elite.

Now...  If you could guarantee that there would never be a major leak (you can't) and guarantee that a sizable portion of the massive profits would go towards US infrastructure (never going to happen), then I would be all for it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 21, 2014, 11:47:50 AM
If you want to see how good the pipeline would be, package the bill with a massive reduction in the tax subsidies oil companies receive. Let's see if the pipeline ever gets built under those terms.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 21, 2014, 11:49:48 AM
If you want to see how good the pipeline would be, package the bill with a massive reduction in the tax subsidies oil companies receive. Let's see if the pipeline ever gets built under those terms.
Can't you apply that logic to pretty much any industry?

Especially anyone with a union, and Aww what happens
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on November 21, 2014, 04:41:46 PM
This thread sucks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 21, 2014, 07:43:03 PM
Going in a different direction, if I may. Sort of.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/11/20/3595067/walmart-food-drive-oklahoma/

Quote
Oklahoma Gov. Mary Fallin (R) has prohibited cities from enacting paid sick leave requirements.

I thought that one of the abiding principles of Republican politics was about small government, local governance and allowing people to determine their own local support infrastructures rather than have the big bad Federal government mandate such things. Why then is a state governor preventing local decision making? Isn't that Republicans being big government? It's almost like there's another agenda at work.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 21, 2014, 08:02:25 PM
Going in a different direction, if I may. Sort of.

http://thinkprogress.org/economy/2014/11/20/3595067/walmart-food-drive-oklahoma/

I thought that one of the abiding principles of Republican politics was about small government, local governance and allowing people to determine their own local support infrastructures rather than have the big bad Federal government mandate such things. Why then is a state governor preventing local decision making? Isn't that Republicans being big government? It's almost like there's another agenda at work.

Republicans not supporting big government is nothing more than an urban myth.  The republican house has blocked the will of the majority of the people in this country since January 2010.  The last republican president increased the size and scope of federal government more than any president preceding him in decades.

But I'm pretty sure you already knew that and were just trying to make a point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 22, 2014, 01:55:38 AM

Well it seems to me having the ban in place worked just fine in getting production up. With the ban in place the US's production ramped up just fine. With net neutral oil production and usage, the ME would have zero influence on this country. There are also the strategic reserves, so not all oil is refined and shipped.

Also Exxon and Chevron etc all have vast production facilities and agreements in other countries. They don't need to export US originated oil. They can use or do whatever they want with oil produced from offshore sources. It's not like the oil produced here is their only source or their main source, it ain't.

Interesting article: http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-20/cheap-oil-era-tilts-geopolitical-power-to-u-s-.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 22, 2014, 08:46:11 AM
Interesting article: http://mobile.bloomberg.com/news/2014-11-20/cheap-oil-era-tilts-geopolitical-power-to-u-s-.html


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
great thanks it will give me something to read on the plane tomorrow.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on December 12, 2014, 12:24:41 AM
So it turns out America tortuted a bunch of people. U-S-A!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 17, 2014, 10:37:02 AM
Obama gets the Tom Brady treatment from world leaders:

http://youtu.be/P2Pv1FTHR6c
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 17, 2014, 11:51:03 AM
Oh what the hell happened there?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on December 17, 2014, 01:34:20 PM
That video is so old.  He's introducing them all, not trying to shake hands.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 17, 2014, 10:24:19 PM
Obama discovers cure for cancer.  Tea Party is outraged, saying cancer was Gods plan.  News at 11.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 17, 2014, 10:54:34 PM

That video is so old.  He's introducing them all, not trying to shake hands.

Ah, makes sense now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 17, 2014, 10:55:43 PM

Obama discovers cure for cancer.  Tea Party is outraged, saying cancer was Gods plan.  News at 11.

No matter who's president there will be people to complain about every little thing they do.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 24, 2014, 11:00:00 PM
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2014/12/23/now-that-the-dow-has-hit-18000-let-us-remember-the-worst-op-ed-in-history/?tid=sm_fb

Gas prices at a crazy low, the Dow at an all time high. Thanks Obama.

(Yes, I know that neither of those are entirely down to him but given the inverse was apparently true according to conservative commentary a few years ago, I think we get to play the reverse now.)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 24, 2014, 11:59:39 PM
I thought raising taxes would have a more negative effect, but it's also impossible to say how much better the economy would be if he hadn't.

But the economy is fine, which means I couldn't care less about politics.

Though during the Bush years, even when the economy was booming and unemployment was close to 4pct, people still acted like he was personally shipping jobs overseas. Basically people are stupid and love to complain.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 05, 2015, 09:02:53 AM
You know who's really disappointing? Rand Paul.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 05, 2015, 09:56:57 AM

You know who's really disappointing? Rand Paul.

We are going to see so many anti-vac tea partiers now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 05, 2015, 10:28:57 AM
They're really sticking to the "government can't tell me what to do" narrative.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 05, 2015, 10:33:34 AM
They're really sticking to the "government can't tell me what to do" narrative.

It's more like "the opposite of whatever Obama says" since this all got rolling when Obama commented on the necessity of vaccines.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 05, 2015, 10:35:36 AM

It's more like "the opposite of whatever Obama says" since this all got rolling when Obama commented on the necessity of vaccines.

That's what pisses me off about politics. Reminds me of the opposition to No Child Left Behind by Bush from the left, simply because it was introduced by Bush.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 05, 2015, 10:51:02 AM
That's what pisses me off about politics. Reminds me of the opposition to No Child Left Behind by Bush from the left, simply because it was introduced by Bush.

Well he did say "Mission accomplished".

Anyway, I completely agree with what you said in theory (I don't know about NCLB). Politics is nothing more than, " I don't like you so therefore I don't like your halfway decent idea."

We went from having the world best infrastructure to one that is literally crumbling. We have no bullet train, we have airports that are veritable mouse droppings compared to the great airports of the world. Why is this the case? Because our politicians are self serving faggots. I honestly believe we need to start over and get rid of every single one of those scumbags. We need to get politicians in that represent us not resent us.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 05, 2015, 10:53:03 AM

That's what pisses me off about politics. Reminds me of the opposition to No Child Left Behind by Bush from the left, simply because it was introduced by Bush.

Lol.  No.  NCLB was opposed because it was excrement.  Talk to a teacher.  If anything, people resist educational chane because it's change.  That's why the Common Core, a legitimately excellent shift in curriculum development and teaching, has been roundly opposed by those with misinformation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 05, 2015, 10:58:18 AM
Lol.  No.  NCLB was opposed because it was excrement.  Talk to a teacher.  If anything, people resist educational chane because it's change.  That's why the Common Core, a legitimately excellent shift in curriculum development and teaching, has been roundly opposed by those with misinformation.

You think common core is good? I have seen the math component and honestly it makes me nuts. My friends hate it, their kids have to do a lot of that curriculum.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 05, 2015, 11:17:17 AM
Yeah, my brother and his wife are both teachers and they hate common core. My wife and I hate trying to figure it out when my 7yo needs help with his math homework.

NCLB is awful too. We don't mature intellectually by catering to the lowest common denominator. You'd think the right would be more in favor of competition breeding winners in the education system.

In the end though, the reality is that there are very few politicians in it for the people on either side of the aisle. The two party system is a failure. As a society we've moved too far into black-or-white territory. On far too many issues today the majority have a "my way or nothing" opinion.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 05, 2015, 11:45:42 AM

You think common core is good? I have seen the math component and honestly it makes me nuts. My friends hate it, their kids have to do a lot of that curriculum.

Yes.  People who don't like common core don't understand what it's doing.  My daughter's school has been using it for years.  She's in 2nd grade and explained the concept and logic behind multiplication well enough that my preschooler can now multiply.  She will never see a times table or have to memorize math facts, and she will be better at math because of it.

Common Core is basically teaching students to develop their own modes of understanding which all lead to memorization.  It's active learning and it's stronger by far.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 05, 2015, 11:47:37 AM

Yeah, my brother and his wife are both teachers and they hate common core. My wife and I hate trying to figure it out when my 7yo needs help with his math homework.

NCLB is awful too. We don't mature intellectually by catering to the lowest common denominator. You'd think the right would be more in favor of competition breeding winners in the education system.

In the end though, the reality is that there are very few politicians in it for the people on either side of the aisle. The two party system is a failure. As a society we've moved too far into black-or-white territory. On far too many issues today the majority have a "my way or nothing" opinion.

I'm guessing your brother and his wife don't teach elementary school.  Wait until kids get to their rooms who have been raised in the system.  The teachers in my family have encountered resistance from teachers who don't want to change things and get stubborn, but it's such a better system.

It's going to be harder working with your kids because you learned in an algorithm-based system.  It's why we have such failures in math at higher levels and why kids go through and memorize math but never understand it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 05, 2015, 11:49:42 AM
Oh, and common core is as far from catering to the LCD as it gets, which it seems you'd appreciate.  The kids with the brightest minds will learn faster and be stronger in math.  It's funny because it's the way I intuitively did math when I was a kid, which is why I can still do and figure out just about anything mathematically.  I wasn't sure how well it would work with the average student, but after watching this school use it several years down the line of implementation, it's outstanding.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on February 05, 2015, 12:46:06 PM
You think common core is good? I have seen the math component and honestly it makes me nuts. My friends hate it, their kids have to do a lot of that curriculum.

Common core would be freaking fantastic if we trained our teachers to be able to teach it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on February 05, 2015, 12:51:18 PM
I think a lot of the issue with common core is the way its taught. I saw some question like how to get 10 from 8+5.  They were trying to teach the kids that adding is easier if you know that 8+2=10 and 5-2=3 that you can get to 13. I probably just did as bad a job explaining it as the question did.

Something like the above concept I got intuitively at some point but other concepts I see from common core blow my mind.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 05, 2015, 01:21:42 PM

Oh, and common core is as far from catering to the LCD as it gets, which it seems you'd appreciate.  The kids with the brightest minds will learn faster and be stronger in math.  It's funny because it's the way I intuitively did math when I was a kid, which is why I can still do and figure out just about anything mathematically.  I wasn't sure how well it would work with the average student, but after watching this school use it several years down the line of implementation, it's outstanding.

Is this related to that guy who used to do infomercials back in the day about a new way of doing math etc.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 05, 2015, 02:13:49 PM

Is this related to that guy who used to do infomercials back in the day about a new way of doing math etc.

I have no idea.  I don't remember those.  I just started doing stuff that way because I was in a magnet program that encouraged us to do things our way.  I'm impressed they're doing so well now with ALL students.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 05, 2015, 02:15:42 PM

Common core would be freaking fantastic if we trained our teachers to be able to teach it.

Yeah, that could be an issue.  I've only seen it at a handful of schools that have good teachers.  My mom is a master teacher, mentor teacher, teacher trainer, etc and after decades on the job thinks it's the best thing she's seen, but she's also always been a hands on creative teacher.  NCLB was the one thing that made her tear her hair out because it set kids back so much.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 05, 2015, 02:26:58 PM

I think a lot of the issue with common core is the way its taught. I saw some question like how to get 10 from 8+5.  They were trying to teach the kids that adding is easier if you know that 8+2=10 and 5-2=3 that you can get to 13. I probably just did as bad a job explaining it as the question did.

Something like the above concept I got intuitively at some point but other concepts I see from common core blow my mind.

Yeah, those "samples" that get shared around the Internet like they're somehow standard Common Core are really misleading.  The kids in my daughter's class did hands on math.  They'd draw it, break numbers apart, do whatever made sense to them to see how the process worked.  Because of that, the algorithm became just a natural discovery.  Common core doesn't teach "this is how you do it in a weird way".  It asks "how can you figure out how to do it", and then the algorithms make sense.  Like I said, these kids have never seen a times table or math facts, but they do math better than a lot of adults I know and actually understand how it works.

For my daughter, multiplication is just chunking (if she saw 12 x 13, her brain would just split 12 x 10 and 12 x 3 and then add them up intuitively).  Because she learned it on her own, it's a rapid process.  Algorithms would have taught her to multiply digits and carry and so many steps she wouldn't need.  When I first showed her how we multiply using the algorithm, it made sense to her immediately because she knew why it worked.

It's the same with the reading.  They're learning how to analyze instead of summarize.  That's the part that has frustrated English teachers at the high school level, because they do long, deep reading now, looking at quantifiable arguments instead of reading a book and just talking about it in whatever way you feel.  There's no BS.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 05, 2015, 02:37:46 PM
For my daughter, multiplication is just chunking (if she saw 12 x 13, her brain would just split 12 x 10 and 12 x 3 and then add them up intuitively).  Because she learned it on her own, it's a rapid process.

That's how I do it too.

It's the same with the reading.  They're learning how to analyze instead of summarize.  That's the part that has frustrated English teachers at the high school level, because they do long, deep reading now, looking at quantifiable arguments instead of reading a book and just talking about it in whatever way you feel.  There's no BS.

But then how will we know what the blue curtains symbolize?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 05, 2015, 02:52:50 PM
Mind. Blown.

No wonder I've always sucked at math.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 05, 2015, 03:17:11 PM
The secret to do more complex math is to break it down. Everyone I know that's good at math can break numbers down into simpler forms and then add them back up. I have always done that and when sober I am cracker jack with math.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 05, 2015, 03:25:10 PM
The secret to do more complex math is to break it down. Everyone I know that's good at math can break numbers down into simpler forms and then add them back up. I have always done that and when sober I am cracker jack with math.

And now it's the standard.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 05, 2015, 03:29:52 PM
Mind. Blown.

No wonder I've always sucked at math.

All those images of 8 billion steps to get to the answer in that way are horse excrement.  It's not how they actually teach it.  It IS how some kids explain their reasoning, which is what they're encouraged to do.  Explain their thought process.  That's a skill that some adults still haven't mastered let alone a 6 year old.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 05, 2015, 03:55:08 PM
I know nothing about Common Core except that Donald Trump is against it, and on that basis alone I know it's an excellent idea.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 15, 2015, 08:15:10 AM
Someone I know shared this.

(http://tapatalk.imageshack.com/v2/15/02/15/3cb94123fce62c072bc34a5d294a2a05.jpg)

lol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 15, 2015, 08:37:18 AM
They included freaking Rachel Ray?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: guinness77 on February 15, 2015, 08:54:11 AM
People care about Howard Dean's opinion?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on February 15, 2015, 08:57:03 AM
I care what Howard Dean thinks.

yaaaaaaaaaaaaw
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: guinness77 on February 15, 2015, 09:04:14 AM
I care what Howard Dean thinks.

yaaaaaaaaaaaaw
Haha, I loved when Howard Stern made that version of Zeppelin's "Going to California" with Dean screaming the name of the states. Classic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 15, 2015, 09:45:21 AM
They included freaking Rachel Ray?
I was just thinking is Ray and
Degeneres the best examples of successful women they could come up with
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: guinness77 on February 15, 2015, 10:03:35 AM
Holy excrement, it took me a minute but I found it. Hilarious. I haven't heard this in years.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=qu7hUQHqexE
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 15, 2015, 12:56:35 PM

They included freaking Rachel Ray?

My first thought.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 15, 2015, 12:56:52 PM

People care about Howard Dean's opinion?

My second thought.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 15, 2015, 01:01:23 PM
Yeah that list is a wtf list. That can't possibly be the two best examples of women they could find.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 15, 2015, 02:01:54 PM
I feel like comedians shouldn't count.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 15, 2015, 04:48:06 PM
I feel like comedians shouldn't count.

To be fair, most comedians aren't worth $300 million.

Yeah that list is a wtf list. That can't possibly be the two best examples of women they could find.

They just went for recognizable faces.  Otherwise, guys like Ron Meyer and Sheldon Adelson would have been MUCH better choices than George Washington and Abraham Lincoln, both of whom came from an age when college wasn't an automatic.  Even Walt Disney and Harry Truman aren't strong examples for the modern day.  Anyway, the recognition factor is why you didn't get Mary Kay Ash or Debbi Fields or Madam CJ Walker.  And all of the modern day men are tech billionaires, AKA people from a male dominated industry.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 15, 2015, 04:52:21 PM
Yeah, anyone before the 1930s shouldn't count either. Chances are if you were from an upper class family in the 19th century, you were already more educated than most college graduates today by the time you were in High School.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 15, 2015, 05:01:49 PM
Harvard entrance exam 1899:
http://graphics8.nytimes.com/packages/pdf/education/harvardexam.pdf
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: hawk on February 16, 2015, 09:46:21 AM
Yeah, anyone before the 1930s shouldn't count either. Chances are if you were from an upper class family in the 19th century, you were already more educated than most college graduates today by the time you were in High School.

How sad, but true.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 16, 2015, 09:51:13 AM

How sad, but true.

Not necessarily a bad thing though. Education and knowledge is more spread out today than 100 years ago. You had the wealthy elite being super educated and the general population barely being able to read and write. The difference between a guy like Thomas Jefferson and a farmer in germs of education in 1800 was much much greater than say the difference between Obama and a fast food employee today.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 16, 2015, 09:54:35 AM
Yeah, anyone before the 1930s shouldn't count either. Chances are if you were from an upper class family in the 19th century, you were already more educated than most college graduates today by the time you were in High School.

Only if you consider a knowledge of the classics to be the sole determinant of education.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 16, 2015, 09:59:28 AM
Someone has to be the janitor.  Seemed appropriate to say here.  Not sure.  Just threw it out there.  Carry on.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 16, 2015, 10:06:00 AM
Someone has to be the janitor.  Seemed appropriate to say here.  Not sure.  Just threw it out there.  Carry on.

Racist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 16, 2015, 10:26:55 AM
Racist.

(http://static.gigwise.com/gallery/3722553_warrant-a.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 19, 2015, 01:59:40 PM
http://money.cnn.com/2015/02/19/news/companies/walmart-wages/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 19, 2015, 02:06:59 PM
Hey, half a million people just got a $4k a year raise on average. Not bad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on February 19, 2015, 02:20:48 PM
Yeah, that's pretty good. They should see an uptick in morale for sure. Maybe going there won't be like a trip to the dentist now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 19, 2015, 02:45:47 PM
Yeah, that's pretty good. They should see an uptick in morale for sure. Maybe going there won't be like a trip to the dentist now.

Why?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 19, 2015, 02:57:24 PM
Higher salary = better quality of employees.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on February 19, 2015, 03:06:13 PM
Why?

I usually don't have to but every now and then my only choices to get something are wait a few days for amazon or go to wally world.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 19, 2015, 03:15:31 PM
Walmart is depressing. You walk by the people doing clothes shopping and you just want to kill yourself.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 19, 2015, 03:17:52 PM
Walmart is depressing. You walk by the people doing clothes shopping and you just want to kill yourself.

Nothing worse than seeing Jim Harbaugh buying a pallet of khakis.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 19, 2015, 03:36:33 PM
I usually don't have to but every now and then my only choices to get something are wait a few days for amazon or go to wally world.

I hear you. I used to go in there only on really off hours, for stupid errands, like 3-4 am on weekends and would get in and out of there in 10-15 minutes. Then they cut back staff and the lines were 10-15 deep. I left a cart there of bullshit I didn't want to wait to get. I have to go to a different town, one of the only Walmarts near an affluent area, then there are no lines.  I may do that 1 time a year max. I hate that freaking place.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 19, 2015, 03:38:56 PM
Walmart is depressing. You walk by the people doing clothes shopping and you just want to kill yourself.

Hahahah clothes shopping there is weird. I shop for boxer briefs and white socks, very rarely. Those are the only clothes I ever bought there. All my work and leisure clothes I buy at really good outlet stores. At least down here they have ridiculous outlet stores, in comparison, they suck in NY (just outlet stores).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 19, 2015, 03:53:06 PM
Higher salary = better quality of employees.

Hang on, isn't this the point where you and dcm are supposed to tell us all about how they'll simply lay thousands of staff off and replace them with self service counters or robots or Mexicans or something?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 19, 2015, 03:58:40 PM

Hey, half a million people just got a $4k a year raise on average. Not bad.

Where did you see that $4k number?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 19, 2015, 03:59:54 PM

Hang on, isn't this the point where you and dcm are supposed to tell us all about how they'll simply lay thousands of staff off and replace them with self service counters or robots or Mexicans or something?

Oh don't you worry. These companies will figure out ways to make the money back. Now other retailers will be under pressure to raise wages. Walmart can afford a decrease in net profits, but maybe Target can't. For the PR they'll raise them, but think for a second that there aren't analysts working on new and creative ways for automation to cut the number of employees. The companies have a responsibility to their shareholders first and foremost, and shareholders don't like decreases in profits.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 19, 2015, 04:01:41 PM

Where did you see that $4k number?

I just did some quick math in my head. Average increase of $2 per hour. Average workweek 20 hours. $40 a week. 52 weeks a a year.

... and I got a new number: $2k.

In my original calculation I put down 40 hours a week.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 19, 2015, 04:03:01 PM
It says full time wages will go up an average of 6 cents per hour on average.  The workers making minimum wage will make an additional $1.75 per hour, but most of them are part time.  So at 20 hrs a week, that's $1800 a year.  Still good on Walmart and makes a difference, but let's not oversell it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 19, 2015, 04:04:39 PM

I just did some quick math in my head. Average increase of $2 per hour. Average workweek 20 hours. $40 a week. 52 weeks a a year.

... and I got a new number: $2k.

In my original calculation I put down 40 hours a week.

$1.75 is the max increase, not average.  They are boosting the minimum.  Again, it makes a difference for people trying to get a job, but it states in there that according to Walmart, the average full time wage will go up 6 cents an hour.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 19, 2015, 04:14:27 PM
For some reason I was thinking that the minimum wage was still $5.25 an hour.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 19, 2015, 08:33:50 PM
Hang on, isn't this the point where you and dcm are supposed to tell us all about how they'll simply lay thousands of staff off and replace them with self service counters or robots or Mexicans or something?
Increasing the minimum wage to 25$/hr or whatever you crazy lefties want it to be is a little different than  6 cents an hour
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 20, 2015, 05:38:25 AM
Hang on, isn't this the point where you and dcm are supposed to tell us all about how they'll simply lay thousands of staff off and replace them with self service counters or robots or Mexicans or something?
Mexican robots are even cheaper.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 20, 2015, 06:41:55 AM
How many times have we heard "This isn't a police problem. It's a race problem."?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/in-fairfax-va-a-different-no-less-scary-police-shooting-1.2960995
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 20, 2015, 09:47:47 AM

How many times have we heard "This isn't a police problem. It's a race problem."?

http://www.cbc.ca/news/world/in-fairfax-va-a-different-no-less-scary-police-shooting-1.2960995

White lives matter!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 20, 2015, 10:01:11 AM
Wow that article is freaking disgusting, that officer is a freaking disgrace.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: guinness77 on February 20, 2015, 10:20:00 AM
Wow that article is freaking disgusting, that officer is a freaking disgrace.
Better question would be how does he still have a job?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 20, 2015, 10:43:04 AM
Better question would be how does he still have a job?
Because the guy he shot was white.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 20, 2015, 10:51:25 AM
Better question would be how does he still have a job?

An even better question is how the freak isn't he in jail. That's an illegal, unlawful killing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: guinness77 on February 20, 2015, 11:17:25 AM
An even better question is how the freak isn't he in jail. That's an illegal, unlawful killing.
Yeah. Pretty freaking amazing, isn't it?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 20, 2015, 03:03:58 PM
You guys are being too hard on him. He had an argument with his wife. Cut him some slack.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: hawk on February 20, 2015, 05:36:36 PM
You guys are being too hard on him. He had an argument with his wife. Cut him some slack.

Bullshit excuse.

However, his wrist was hurting him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 11, 2015, 02:59:32 PM
No-one commenting on the quite astonishing letter written by the 47 Republican senators to the government of Iran, telling them to ignore the President of the United States?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 11, 2015, 03:01:15 PM
No-one commenting on the quite astonishing letter written by the 47 Republican senators to the government of Iran, telling them to ignore the President of the United States?

BENGHAZI
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 11, 2015, 03:07:01 PM

No-one commenting on the quite astonishing letter written by the 47 Republican senators to the government of Iran, telling them to ignore the President of the United States?

That's embarrassing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 11, 2015, 03:22:03 PM

No-one commenting on the quite astonishing letter written by the 47 Republican senators to the government of Iran, telling them to ignore the President of the United States?

I was too afraid of someone somehow trying to defend them.  I've seen too much of it.  I keep hoping someone finds a way to end the level of partisan politics we see now, but it's just a bunch of freaking overgrown children name calling and lying while they pocket all the money.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 11, 2015, 03:24:55 PM
In case anyone was wondering.

Signatories:
Richard Shelby (Ala.)
Jeff Sessions (Ala.)
Dan Sullivan (Alaska)
John McCain (Ariz.) (clearly doesn't give a freak anymore)
John Boozman (Ark.)
Tom Cotton (Ark.)
Cory Gardner (Colo.)
Marco Rubio (Fla.)
Johnny Isakson (Ga.)
David Perdue (Ga.)
Mike Crapo (Idaho) (lol, crapo)
Jim Risch (Idaho)
Mark Kirk (Ill.)
Chuck Grassley (Iowa)
Joni Ernst (Iowa)
Pat Roberts (Kansas)
Jerry Moran (Kansas)
Mitch McConnell (Ky.) (obviously)
Rand Paul (Ky.)
David Vitter (La.)
Bill Cassidy (La.)
Roger Wicker (Miss.)
Roy Blunt (Mo.)
Steve Daines (Mont.)
Deb Fischer (Neb.)
Ben Sasse (Neb.)
Dean Heller (Nev.)
Kelly Ayotte (N.H.)
Richard Burr (N.C.)
Thom Tillis (N.C.)
John Hoeven (N.D.)
Rob Portman (Ohio)
Jim Inhofe (Okla.) (thinks snowball disproves climate change)
James Lankford (Okla.)
Pat Toomey (Pa.)
Lindsey Graham (S.C.) (of course)
Tim Scott (S.C.)
John Thune (S.D.)
Mike Rounds (S.D.)
John Cornyn (Texas)
Ted Cruz (Texas)
Orin Hatch (Utah) (duh)
Mike Lee (Utah)
Shelley Moore Capito (W.V.)
Ron Johnson (Wis.)
Mike Enzi (Wyo.)
John Barrasso (Wyo.)

Did not sign:
Lisa Murkowski (Alaska)
Jeff Flake (Ariz.)
Daniel Coats (Ind.)
Susan Collins (Maine)
Thad Cochran (Miss.)
Lamar Alexander (Tenn.)
Bob Corker (Tenn.)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 11, 2015, 03:26:56 PM
Rand Paul drives me freaking insane because he'll do/say two things I totally agree with and then follow it up with excrement like this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 11, 2015, 03:30:29 PM
Those guys from SAE in Oklahoma were apparently just imitating hip hop

http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/morning-joe-panelists-blame-oklahoma-fraternity-racism-on-black-culture-and-rap-music/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 11, 2015, 03:31:03 PM

Rand Paul drives me freaking insane because he'll do/say two things I totally agree with and then follow it up with excrement like this.

He's not his dad and even his father has some big flaws.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 11, 2015, 04:20:09 PM
I was fine with Ron Paul until he basically blamed us for 911.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 16, 2015, 10:41:24 AM
Yeah, I want to drop the T word in this thread, but I think I may have stopped giving a excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 16, 2015, 10:43:54 AM
Yeah, I want to drop the T word in this thread, but I think I may have stopped giving a excrement.


Tehran?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mX8y-91tfCo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 16, 2015, 10:55:46 AM
Not to be overly cryptic, but it rhymes with reason...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 16, 2015, 10:56:51 AM
Not to be overly cryptic, but it rhymes with reason...


teasin'
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 16, 2015, 11:00:04 AM

Yeah, I want to drop the T word in this thread, but I think I may have stopped giving a excrement.

If the tables were turned, it's all we would be hearing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 16, 2015, 11:01:36 AM
Presidential candidate Ted Cruz has called for repeal of the bill that introduced Common Core. See if you can spot the problem with that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 16, 2015, 11:06:13 AM
Presidential candidate Ted Cruz has called for repeal of the bill that introduced Common Core. See if you can spot the problem with that.

I'm assuming he either voted to pass it or helped introduce it in some way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 16, 2015, 11:07:35 AM
I'm assuming he either voted to pass it or helped introduce it in some way.

Apparently there is no bill relating to Common Core and it had nothing to do with the Federal Government.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 16, 2015, 11:09:32 AM
Apparently there is no bill relating to Common Core and it had nothing to do with the Federal Government.

(http://i.imgur.com/0mw1I8e.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 16, 2015, 11:24:02 AM
Ted Cruz is proof positive to teh staggering stupidity of 'Murica:

1.) How the freak did that moron get elected?

2.) Who filled out his candidacy forms?

The guy literally eats rocks.

Nevermind he was born in Canada, explains everything.  Why the freak didn't he stay there and ruin that country with his brand of bigoted stupid.

If he got into Harvard I know a ton of other people that can go there as well.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 16, 2015, 11:25:45 AM
1.) How the freak did that moron get elected?

Texas
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 16, 2015, 11:28:29 AM
Texas

Florida would have been more reassuring actually.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 16, 2015, 11:30:41 AM
Florida would have been more reassuring actually.

You guys already have Rubio.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 16, 2015, 11:38:07 AM
You guys already have Rubio.

Hey nothing wrong with a two'fer
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 16, 2015, 12:13:16 PM

Texas

Yeah but still
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 16, 2015, 12:21:18 PM
Slightly off-topic, but slightly not. Has anyone seen the internet banner ads for Texas? It reads: "It's like a whole other country."

Except for slavery, sometimes I wish the North had just said "Oh F this."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 16, 2015, 12:49:19 PM
Slightly off-topic, but slightly not. Has anyone seen the internet banner ads for Texas? It reads: "It's like a whole other country."

Except for slavery, sometimes I wish the North had just said "Oh F this."

The North wouldn't be what it is if the South had seceded successfully.  Say goodbye to the cheap and plentiful resources that would have been traded to Britain and France instead.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 16, 2015, 02:11:53 PM
The North wouldn't be what it is if the South had seceded successfully.  Say goodbye to the cheap and plentiful resources that would have been traded to Britain and France instead.

Meh. F the details. I just despise the South.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 16, 2015, 02:12:55 PM
Meh. F the details. I just despise the South.

Join  the club man.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on March 16, 2015, 02:54:46 PM
Join  the club man.
Card-holding member here, lol.
I spent my elementary-school years in central FL and still have plenty of family down there.

I love the weather in the south, but it's polluted with proud-of-my-ignorance dipshits. The politicians blatantly and condescendingly take advantage of that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 16, 2015, 03:11:59 PM
Card-holding member here, lol.
I spent my elementary-school years in central FL and still have plenty of family down there.

I love the weather in the south, but it's polluted with proud-of-my-ignorance dipshits. The politicians blatantly and condescendingly take advantage of that.

Miami is full of dipshits. I named my first kid after the people of Miami, Dipshit Puck has a great ring to it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 16, 2015, 05:28:55 PM
I wonder what the south would look like today if they had successfully seceded. No way slavery would've lasted another  50 years anyway, as there most likely would've been trade pressure to ban the practice.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 16, 2015, 05:30:38 PM
I wonder what the south would look like today if they had successfully seceded. No way slavery would've lasted another  50 years anyway, as there most likely would've been trade pressure to ban the practice.
The Little Rock Jets would have won the Super Bowl nine times with Bubba Brady at QB.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 17, 2015, 01:39:40 AM
I was too afraid of someone somehow trying to defend them.  I've seen too much of it.  I keep hoping someone finds a way to end the level of partisan politics we see now, but it's just a bunch of freaking overgrown children name calling and lying while they pocket all the money.

Lol I get that I'm in Lib City, but it's not hard to defend their actions when Democratic leaders have openly defied Presidential foreign policy a number of times.  I'm not saying I agree with what they did but anyone really outraged by this honestly needs a history lesson.

Puck I'm not a fan of Cruz as his antics with trying to circumvent SCOTUS via a constitutional amendment re:gay marriage was a freaking joke (kind of like when the left tried to go around the Hobby Lobby ruling), but  I'd vote for him in a national election ahead of Hills a million times over.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 17, 2015, 02:15:04 PM
Lol I get that I'm in Lib City, but it's not hard to defend their actions when Democratic leaders have openly defied Presidential foreign policy a number of times.  I'm not saying I agree with what they did but anyone really outraged by this honestly needs a history lesson.

OK, I'll bite.  Please elaborate.

Quote
Puck I'm not a fan of Cruz as his antics with trying to circumvent SCOTUS via a constitutional amendment re:gay marriage was a freaking joke (kind of like when the left tried to go around the Hobby Lobby ruling), but  I'd vote for him in a national election ahead of Hills a million times over.

Never mind my previous request.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 17, 2015, 02:17:18 PM
I can't imagine voting for anyone I'm not a fan of.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 17, 2015, 02:23:29 PM

OK, I'll bite.  Please elaborate.

Never mind my previous request.

Were the bush years a complete blur to you?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 17, 2015, 02:28:50 PM
Were the bush years a complete blur to you?

Clear as a bell.  I don't recall Dem senators sending letters to the Taliban, directly opposing the President, though.  Also don't recall them inviting foreign leaders to speak before a joint session of congress without the presidents approval.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 17, 2015, 02:40:09 PM
Lol I get that I'm in Lib City, but it's not hard to defend their actions when Democratic leaders have openly defied Presidential foreign policy a number of times.  I'm not saying I agree with what they did but anyone really outraged by this honestly needs a history lesson.

Puck I'm not a fan of Cruz as his antics with trying to circumvent SCOTUS via a constitutional amendment re:gay marriage was a freaking joke (kind of like when the left tried to go around the Hobby Lobby ruling), but  I'd vote for him in a national election ahead of Hills a million times over.

I don't think you read that comment properly.  Try again.

When you respond to a comment expressing a wish for an end to these partisan politics, more partisan politics generally don't form a convincing counterargument.  I'm not a Democrat.  I'm also not a Republican.  I don't care who called who what.  That's why I called them ALL overgrown children.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 17, 2015, 02:45:29 PM
As for it being easy to defend their actions, I also don't find "Well, he started it!" to be an appropriate response for elected officials.  It sure does work for the angry masses of party line idiots, though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 17, 2015, 04:06:28 PM
Were the bush years a complete blur to you?

Enough moonshine and cocaine, and hell yes it's all a blur.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 17, 2015, 07:12:16 PM
As for it being easy to defend their actions, I also don't find "Well, he started it!" to be an appropriate response for elected officials.  It sure does work for the angry masses of party line idiots, though.

Except my argument isn't one of "well he started it." Showing historical actions isn't really a "well he started it" argument, its just merely stating a fact that this action is something that's been undertaken by politicians throughout history. That doesn't make it right. It also doesn't make it this unprecedented act of treason that some would like you to believe it is.
Besides, if you detest that level of arguing, I have no idea how you made it through the 2012 election campaign when everything was still Bush's fault four years later.

I can't imagine voting for anyone I'm not a fan of.

Fair enough, but I'm willing to take almost anyone over the "ready for Hillary" brigade that's about to switch their accusations from racism to sexism the minute people want to point out every obvious flaw that's inherent in their chosen savior.

Clear as a bell.  I don't recall Dem senators sending letters to the Taliban, directly opposing the President, though.  Also don't recall them inviting foreign leaders to speak before a joint session of congress without the presidents approval.

You're right, they didn't send letters, the current clown we have as a Secretary of State only met with Managua to meet with Ortega personally, directly contradicting and undermining Reagan's stated position to back the Contras. As for under Bush, one of his foreign policy efforts was to isolate Syria.

This was the level of deference shown by Congressional Dems towards that Presidential goal:
(http://i661.photobucket.com/albums/uu335/Mj2sexay/pelosi%20and%20assad.jpg) (http://s661.photobucket.com/user/Mj2sexay/media/pelosi%20and%20assad.jpg.html)

So again, while I'm in fundamental agreement that the letter was in poor taste, when I hear the left drop the "Treason" word, I'm sorry but I have to laugh at the hypocrisy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 17, 2015, 08:12:50 PM
Hey you're not fitting the narrative that Parisian politics was invented after Obama got elected!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 17, 2015, 08:17:52 PM
Well I might bag on Cruz being a freaking idiot but I won't pretend to say that this two party system isn't full of jackasses on both sides. By full like 95 percent each party.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 17, 2015, 08:51:59 PM
Hey you're not fitting the narrative that Parisian politics was invented after Obama got elected!

I don't know a single person who believes that.  That in itself is part of the narrative.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 17, 2015, 09:02:29 PM
Except my argument isn't one of "well he started it." Showing historical actions isn't really a "well he started it" argument, its just merely stating a fact that this action is something that's been undertaken by politicians throughout history. That doesn't make it right. It also doesn't make it this unprecedented act of treason that some would like you to believe it is.
Besides, if you detest that level of arguing, I have no idea how you made it through the 2012 election campaign when everything was still Bush's fault four years later.

No.  There's a difference between accepting that it's an unfortunate part of politics in this country and stating that it's "not hard to defend it" because the other side did it.  That's absolutely a "Well he started it" argument.  You didn't even show the actions, you merely alluded to them.  We can go all the way back to Adams to find examples of Congress and the president butting heads on foreign policy to varying extent, but you didn't actually mention a single instance.  Either way, if it's "not right", why would you find it so easy to defend?  Acceptance is a very different matter.

I made it through the 2012 election by stumping for Gary Johnson.  Like I said, I'm looking for someone to address the current state of politics.  3rd party candidates have long had an impact on the two major parties, just not in recent years.  The system is due for a shakeup at a level we haven't seen for nearly 100 years.

And I don't believe politics are business as usual these days.  The tone remains the same, but the tenor has changed.  Whatever chaotic elegance once existed is gone.  Defiant ignorance is embraced in a way I'm not sure we've seen since 1832 if ever.  Given the broad and unprecedented access to information we have, it's particularly concerning.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 17, 2015, 09:03:11 PM
Hey you're not fitting the narrative that Parisian politics was invented after Obama got elected!

Did you mean partisan? Either way it's a funny joke. But if you meant partisan and wrote Parisian is makes it 1000% funnier.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 17, 2015, 09:10:32 PM
Did you mean partisan? Either way it's a funny joke. But if you meant partisan and wrote Parisian is makes it 1000% funnier.

I figured he somehow got autocorrected.  He uses Parisian a lot when describing his tastes in men.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 18, 2015, 11:23:36 AM
Except my argument isn't one of "well he started it." Showing historical actions isn't really a "well he started it" argument, its just merely stating a fact that this action is something that's been undertaken by politicians throughout history. That doesn't make it right. It also doesn't make it this unprecedented act of treason that some would like you to believe it is.
Besides, if you detest that level of arguing, I have no idea how you made it through the 2012 election campaign when everything was still Bush's fault four years later.

Fair enough, but I'm willing to take almost anyone over the "ready for Hillary" brigade that's about to switch their accusations from racism to sexism the minute people want to point out every obvious flaw that's inherent in their chosen savior.

You're right, they didn't send letters, the current clown we have as a Secretary of State only met with Managua to meet with Ortega personally, directly contradicting and undermining Reagan's stated position to back the Contras. As for under Bush, one of his foreign policy efforts was to isolate Syria.

This was the level of deference shown by Congressional Dems towards that Presidential goal:
(http://i661.photobucket.com/albums/uu335/Mj2sexay/pelosi%20and%20assad.jpg) (http://s661.photobucket.com/user/Mj2sexay/media/pelosi%20and%20assad.jpg.html)

So again, while I'm in fundamental agreement that the letter was in poor taste, when I hear the left drop the "Treason" word, I'm sorry but I have to laugh at the hypocrisy.

OK, a failed foreign policy from the 80's that should have resulted in the president's impeachment, and democrats not agreeing with most of Bush's policies.  You have to be kidding me about the former, as it has no bearing on discussion of recent history.  The latter is how dissension is supposed to work.  In neither case was the opposition overstepping their bounds.

Either way the presidents involved were on the wrong side of public sentiment, not that it means anything.

Sidestepping a sitting president on foreign policy goes against every rule that exists.  They can debate all they want on the floor of congress, but what they did in both the cases I mentioned were at the very least 'borderline' treasonous actions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 18, 2015, 03:05:00 PM
Not really the right thread for this as it's more state than Federal, but still: WTF?

http://metro.co.uk/2015/03/17/oklahoma-is-banning-atheists-from-getting-married-5107328/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 18, 2015, 03:06:47 PM
Not really the right thread for this as it's more state than Federal, but still: WTF?

http://metro.co.uk/2015/03/17/oklahoma-is-banning-atheists-from-getting-married-5107328/

Atheists are bigger pretenders than gays.

"Do you believe in God"

"Lmao sure."

"okay, you can get married"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 18, 2015, 03:58:44 PM
http://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/2zeib4/oklahoma_is_making_atheist_marriages_illegal/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 18, 2015, 04:04:49 PM
Atheists are bigger pretenders than gays.

"Do you believe in God"

"Lmao sure."

"okay, you can get married"

That's pretty much what I had to do. I even promised we'd raise our kids Catholic.

lmao sure
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 19, 2015, 09:45:02 AM
http://www.mediaite.com/tv/stephen-a-smith-wishes-every-black-american-would-vote-gop-for-one-election/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 19, 2015, 09:53:02 AM

http://www.mediaite.com/tv/stephen-a-smith-wishes-every-black-american-would-vote-gop-for-one-election/

He's right.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 19, 2015, 09:54:10 AM
He's right.

Lol.  No.  He's not.  He's right that the black vote is taken for granted.  His solution is absurd.

Every black person voting Republican for one election would make them look like the uneducated idiots you believe they all are.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 19, 2015, 10:00:45 AM
Lol.  No.  He's not.  He's right that the black vote is taken for granted.  His solution is absurd.

Every black person voting Republican for one election would make them look like the uneducated idiots you believe they all are.

Yeah but still
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 19, 2015, 11:00:55 AM

Lol.  No.  He's not.  He's right that the black vote is taken for granted.  His solution is absurd.

Every black person voting Republican for one election would make them look like the uneducated idiots you believe they all are.

It's become absurd. Blacks just take the
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 19, 2015, 11:01:58 AM
It's become absurd. Blacks just take the
It's become absurd. Blacks just take the
It's become absurd. Blacks just take the
It's become absurd. Blacks just take the
It's become absurd. Blacks just take the
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 19, 2015, 11:02:52 AM
I didn't say they should actually do that, but he's right about blacks just taking any democratic candidate because they feel they have to.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 19, 2015, 11:05:35 AM
I didn't say they should actually do that, but he's right about blacks just taking any democratic candidate because they feel they have to.

If only they had sufficient intelligence to think for themselves, eh? It's almost like only white people are clever enough to see the wonder of the Republican party.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 19, 2015, 11:08:56 AM
I didn't say they should actually do that, but he's right about blacks just taking any democratic candidate because they feel they have to.

Or because poor black people are smarter than poor white people (since we seem to be generalizing).  Why should any poor or lower middle class person vote directly against their own self interest?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 19, 2015, 11:17:36 AM

If only they had sufficient intelligence to think for themselves, eh? It's almost like only white people are clever enough to see the wonder of the Republican party.

Why are white people way more diverse in their political views? Nearly split down the middle. Blacks on the other hand vote overwhelmingly for the democrats and have done so for decades. Why? There's no way all black people share the same political beliefs. People are unique and different and all that. There's another force at play here, and that's what I'm referring to.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 19, 2015, 11:19:11 AM
I didn't say they should actually do that, but he's right about blacks just taking any democratic candidate because they feel they have to.

...do you know any black voters?

They don't vote Democratic because they have to.  They vote that way because they feel marginalized and maligned by the Republicans.  They've switched party allegiances in the past, but they've long been an ignored faction by the Republicans.  It's political strategy for both sides.  Surely you recognize how choosing not to court the "black vote" curries favor with certain parts of the Republican party base.  For many Southern Republicans, the 'welfare queen' has a definite race attached.  That lends an air of superiority to poor whites who become more inclined to vote against their own economic interests.  It's been a crafted message for ages, no different than civil rights largely being a ploy to secure the remaining "black votes" which still held Republican after the New Deal.  It's also no different than the way the Christian vote was courted by the Republican party.  Honestly, what's sadder?  A voting bloc that feels marginalized by race or a voting bloc that feels marginalized by religion?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 19, 2015, 11:20:48 AM
Why are white people way more diverse in their political views? Nearly split down the middle. Blacks on the other hand vote overwhelmingly for the democrats and have done so for decades. Why? There's no way all black people share the same political beliefs. People are unique and different and all that. There's another force at play here, and that's what I'm referring to.

What has the Republican party done to entice black people to vote for them?

Besides Mitt Romney's impromptu rendition of "Who Let the Dogs Out."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 19, 2015, 11:23:17 AM
Why are white people way more diverse in their political views? Nearly split down the middle. Blacks on the other hand vote overwhelmingly for the democrats and have done so for decades. Why? There's no way all black people share the same political beliefs. People are unique and different and all that. There's another force at play here, and that's what I'm referring to.

Civil Rights for whites are not a political issue favored by one party over the other.  Evangelists overwhelmingly vote Republican.  Why?  Because the issues most dear to them are a political issue favored by Republicans.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 19, 2015, 11:25:18 AM


Wait......blacks are allowed to vote now?

Tommy's inner thoughts.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 19, 2015, 11:29:02 AM
...do you know any black voters?

They don't vote Democratic because they have to.  They vote that way because they feel marginalized and maligned by the Republicans.  They've switched party allegiances in the past, but they've long been an ignored faction by the Republicans.  It's political strategy for both sides.  Surely you recognize how choosing not to court the "black vote" curries favor with certain parts of the Republican party base.  For many Southern Republicans, the 'welfare queen' has a definite race attached.  That lends an air of superiority to poor whites who become more inclined to vote against their own economic interests.  It's been a crafted message for ages, no different than civil rights largely being a ploy to secure the remaining "black votes" which still held Republican after the New Deal.  It's also no different than the way the Christian vote was courted by the Republican party.  Honestly, what's sadder?  A voting bloc that feels marginalized by race or a voting bloc that feels marginalized by religion?

Oddly enough there are more whites on welfare and I bet they resoundingly vote republican. I don't like democrats very much but I understand why black people overwhelmingly vote for them. They have to, it's not like there's a choice involved. Republican's hate black people. Honestly this 2 party system needs to die in a fire. I don't think there's a person here represented by either party.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 19, 2015, 11:36:02 AM
Oddly enough there are more whites on welfare and I bet they resoundingly vote republican. I don't like democrats very much but I understand why black people overwhelmingly vote for them. They have to, it's not like there's a choice involved. Republican's hate black people. Honestly this 2 party system needs to die in a fire. I don't think there's a person here represented by either party.

The country is still 72% white so of course more whites are on welfare than anyone else. It would take a staggering disproportion for that not to be the case.

As far as how they vote, I no longer associate with the freeloader crowd but when I was slumming it in upstate NY, I'd say most of them were not the voting type at all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 19, 2015, 11:37:03 AM
Oddly enough there are more whites on welfare and I bet they resoundingly vote republican.

Thank you.  This fact is lost in the discussion way too often.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 19, 2015, 11:37:17 AM
Oddly enough there are more whites on welfare and I bet they resoundingly vote republican. I don't like democrats very much but I understand why black people overwhelmingly vote for them. They have to, it's not like there's a choice involved. Republican's hate black people. Honestly this 2 party system needs to die in a fire. I don't think there's a person here represented by either party.

Are there?  I thought there was a slightly higher number of blacks on welfare.  I know the percentage of blacks on welfare was significantly higher than the percentage of whites, which should surprise no one.

Part of the problem is that institutionalized racism still exists, and the Democratic party is the one that actively tries to address it.  The younger blacks I know who are at least one generation removed from poverty are more open to the Republican party.  I even know some who voted against Obama in 2012.  They're less likely to have faced racism at an institutional level, though they'll admit it still exists.  They're resistant because of their success, but they'll admit privately that it exists for them as well.  This includes difficulties getting a mortgage, etc (I believe there were some hefty settlements because of the mortgage issue recently).  For anyone still living in poverty, though, institutionalized racism is a part of daily life.  Obama was such a token victory for the black community.  It didn't change a damn thing, but they could point to his election as a positive sign.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 19, 2015, 11:38:00 AM
This would indicate more blacks than non-Hispanic whites:

http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 19, 2015, 11:40:02 AM
The country is still 72% white so of course more whites are on welfare than anyone else. It would take a staggering disproportion for that not to be the case.

As far as how they vote, I no longer associate with the food stamp crowd but when I was slumming it in upstate NY, I'd say most of them were not the voting type at all.

 That's simplistic number, if you count hispanics as a separate voting bloc as most are apt to do, it's the low 60's. But I wasn't talking about the reality, more to the point of perception. If you asked the average American, admittedly most likely a mouth breather, they would say most welfare recipients are black. that was my point. Sorry for lack of clarity there.

Also I was speaking mostly about the south, I do not know much about upstate welfare recipients.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 19, 2015, 11:40:52 AM
Are there?  I thought there was a slightly higher number of blacks on welfare.  I know the percentage of blacks on welfare was significantly higher than the percentage of whites, which should surprise no one.

It depends on which study you are reading, as numbers can always be skewed.  But without a doubt, there are more white people on food stamps than any other race.  Your last sentence is obviously true by a landslide.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 19, 2015, 11:44:08 AM
That's simplistic number, if you count hispanics as a separate voting bloc as most are apt to do, it's the low 60's. But I wasn't talking about the reality, more to the point of perception. If you asked the average American, admittedly most likely a mouth breather, they would say most welfare recipients are black. that was my point. Sorry for lack of clarity there.

Also I was speaking mostly about the south, I do not know much about upstate welfare recipients.

Sorry, non-Hispanic whites come in at 63.7%. I knew that number looked a little high.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 19, 2015, 11:45:20 AM
Are there?  I thought there was a slightly higher number of blacks on welfare.  I know the percentage of blacks on welfare was significantly higher than the percentage of whites, which should surprise no one.

Part of the problem is that institutionalized racism still exists, and the Democratic party is the one that actively tries to address it.  The younger blacks I know who are at least one generation removed from poverty are more open to the Republican party.  I even know some who voted against Obama in 2012.  They're less likely to have faced racism at an institutional level, though they'll admit it still exists.  They're resistant because of their success, but they'll admit privately that it exists for them as well.  This includes difficulties getting a mortgage, etc (I believe there were some hefty settlements because of the mortgage issue recently).  For anyone still living in poverty, though, institutionalized racism is a part of daily life.  Obama was such a token victory for the black community.  It didn't change a damn thing, but they could point to his election as a positive sign.

Percentage yes # no.....
Here is a study that says the #'s are close:

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/resource/character/fy2010/fy2010-chap10-ys-final (http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/resource/character/fy2010/fy2010-chap10-ys-final)

Here this is a percentage from the Pew research:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/07/12/the-politics-and-demographics-of-food-stamp-recipients/ (http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/07/12/the-politics-and-demographics-of-food-stamp-recipients/)


Here is another:

http://www.statisticbrain.com/welfare-statistics/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 19, 2015, 11:53:37 AM
Percentage yes # no.....
Here is a study that says the #'s are close:

http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ofa/resource/character/fy2010/fy2010-chap10-ys-final

Here this is a percentage from the Pew research:

http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/07/12/the-politics-and-demographics-of-food-stamp-recipients/



Hmm...Pew is polling, right?  The numbers I posted came from USDHHS.  If a higher percentage of welfare recipients are black, wouldn't that indicate a higher number are black?  A plurality?  I'm not talking about percentage of blacks on welfare and percentage of whites.  That percentage isn't remotely close.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 19, 2015, 11:54:47 AM
Hmm...Pew is polling, right?  The numbers I posted came from USDHHS.  If a higher percentage of welfare recipients are black, wouldn't that indicate a higher number are black?  A plurality?  I'm not talking about percentage of blacks on welfare and percentage of whites.  That percentage isn't remotely close.

I think the Pew is wrong or misleading. The sites I was able to check say Black 38.9% and white 38.8% of welfare recipients.

**Hispanics counted as white probably.**
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 19, 2015, 11:57:11 AM

What has the Republican party done to entice black people to vote for them?

Besides Mitt Romney's impromptu rendition of "Who Let the Dogs Out."

See this is the problem. It's the "them" part that bothers me. Why are they lumped into one category as if they're all affected by the same legislation etc. On a local level, democrats have had decades to help bring low income black families, or any families for that matter, out of poverty and have done nothing. You'd think some people would say "you know what, I'm going to try this other party instead." Hasn't happened because there's this stigma against voting republican for blacks. Black republicans even get labeled "Sellouts" for whatever Fuckn reason. It's ridiculous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 19, 2015, 11:58:48 AM
See this is the problem. It's the "them" part that bothers me. Why are they lumped into one category as if they're all affected by the same legislation etc. On a local level, democrats have had decades to help bring low income black families, or any families for that matter, out of poverty and have done nothing. You'd think some people would say "you know what, I'm going to try this other party instead." Hasn't happened because there's this stigma against voting republican for blacks. Black republicans even get labeled "Sellouts" for whatever Fuckn reason. It's ridiculous.

The Democrats never were able to address who indeed let the dogs out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 19, 2015, 12:13:01 PM
See this is the problem. It's the "them" part that bothers me. Why are they lumped into one category as if they're all affected by the same legislation etc. On a local level, democrats have had decades to help bring low income black families, or any families for that matter, out of poverty and have done nothing. You'd think some people would say "you know what, I'm going to try this other party instead." Hasn't happened because there's this stigma against voting republican for blacks. Black republicans even get labeled "Sellouts" for whatever Fuckn reason. It's ridiculous.

Did you bother reading the other posts in here?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 19, 2015, 12:14:25 PM

Did you bother reading the other posts in here?

No time. I'll come back to it later. Meetings all day.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 19, 2015, 12:17:16 PM
Tommy, what exactly do you think the Republican party is going to do if the black vote decides to give it a chance?  Address institutionalized racism?  freak no, that goes against some of the biggest donors to the party.  It's not going to alienate its core and it's certainly not going to shift the narrative that secures its poor white base.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 19, 2015, 12:18:13 PM
No time. I'll come back to it later. Meetings all day.

And yet you took time to restate the tired, ignorant attitude of shock you've held forever.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 19, 2015, 12:18:55 PM
Quote
Millions of African Americans across the country are already benefiting from the stronger coverage and consumer protections made possible by the Affordable Care Act:

  •     7.8 million African Americans with private insurance now have access to expanded preventive services with no cost-sharing. This includes services such as colonoscopy screening for colon cancer, Pap smears and mammograms for women, well-child visits, and flu shots for all children and adults.
  •     Private plans in the Health Insurance Marketplace are required to cover 10 essential health benefit categories, including maternity and newborn care. Over 390,000 African American women in the individual market alone are projected to gain maternity coverage thanks to the Affordable Care Act.
  •     An estimated 5.1 million African American women with private health insurance now have guaranteed access to women’s preventive services without cost-sharing. These services include well-woman visits, HPV testing, breastfeeding support and counseling, mammograms and screenings for cervical cancer, prenatal care, and other services.
  •     More than 500,000 African American young adults between ages 19 and 26 who would have been uninsured, including 230,000 African American women, now have coverage under their parents’ employer-sponsored or individually purchased health insurance plan.
  •     About 10.4 million African Americans, including 3.9 million adult African American women, no longer have lifetime or annual limits on their health insurance coverage thanks to the Affordable Care Act.
  •     Nearly eight million African Americans with a preexisting health condition are no longer at risk of being denied coverage since the ACA prohibits insurers from denying someone coverage or charging them more because of a pre-existing condition.
  •     The $11 billion in the Affordable Care Act for the nearly 1,300 community health centers has increased the number of patients served by nearly 5 million. Nearly one of every four patients at a health center is African American.

African Americans need to wake up and realize the Democrats don't do squat for them. They should start voting for the party intent on repealing that ridiculous ACA that clearly doesn't benefit them in any demonstrable way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 19, 2015, 12:19:46 PM
Maybe Christian Conservatives should switch parties.  After all, working with Republicans hasn't stopped abortion OR gay marriage.  Give the Democrats a shot!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on March 20, 2015, 08:00:42 AM
Why should Republicans bother trying to get the black vote if it's only worth three fifths
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 20, 2015, 09:17:36 AM
No.  There's a difference between accepting that it's an unfortunate part of politics in this country and stating that it's "not hard to defend it" because the other side did it. That's absolutely a "Well he started it" argument.  You didn't even show the actions, you merely alluded to them.  We can go all the way back to Adams to find examples of Congress and the president butting heads on foreign policy to varying extent, but you didn't actually mention a single instance.  Either way, if it's "not right", why would you find it so easy to defend?  Acceptance is a very different matter.

I made it through the 2012 election by stumping for Gary Johnson.  Like I said, I'm looking for someone to address the current state of politics.  3rd party candidates have long had an impact on the two major parties, just not in recent years.  The system is due for a shakeup at a level we haven't seen for nearly 100 years.

And I don't believe politics are business as usual these days.  The tone remains the same, but the tenor has changed.  Whatever chaotic elegance once existed is gone.  Defiant ignorance is embraced in a way I'm not sure we've seen since 1832 if ever.  Given the broad and unprecedented access to information we have, it's particularly concerning.

I disagree with the bolded. The former argument was the one I was making, or thought I was anyway. This IS a part of politics, and as you said it's been happening since the days of Adams. I didn't think I needed to recount all of the instances of Democrats going against GOP Presidents in exactly the same way, when a simple google search can provide plenty of instances such as these;

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-CA). In April 2007, as the Bush administration pursued pressure against Syrian dictator Bashar Assad, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi went to visit him.

In 1983, Teddy Kennedy sent emissaries to the Soviets to undermine Ronald Reagan’s foreign policy.

House Speaker Jim Wright (D-TX). In 1984, 10 Democrats sent a letter to Daniel Ortega, the head of the military dictatorship in Nicaragua, praising Ortega.

Senator John Kerry (D-MA). Kerry jumped into the pro-Sandanista pool himself in 1985, when he traveled to Nicaragua to negotiate with the regime.

Representatives Jim McDermott (D-WA), David Bonior (D-MI), and Mike Thompson (D-CA). In 2002, the three Congressmen visited Baghdad to play defense for Saddam Hussein’s regime.

Senators John Sparkman (D-AL) and George McGovern (D-SD). The two Senators visited Cuba and met with government actors there in 1975.

I couldn't agree more with your last two paragraphs. I also voted for Johnson.

OK, a failed foreign policy from the 80's that should have resulted in the president's impeachment, and democrats not agreeing with most of Bush's policies.  You have to be kidding me about the former, as it has no bearing on discussion of recent history.  The latter is how dissension is supposed to work.  In neither case was the opposition overstepping their bounds.

Either way the presidents involved were on the wrong side of public sentiment, not that it means anything.

Sidestepping a sitting president on foreign policy goes against every rule that exists.  They can debate all they want on the floor of congress, but what they did in both the cases I mentioned were at the very least 'borderline' treasonous actions.

Literally every one of these is a bullshit rationalization because your chosen President is under fire. According to you dissension is supposed to work by meeting with the opposition, BUT GOD FORBID YOU SEND THEM A LETTER. Why can't you just acknowledge that this is a practice that our government has been taking part in for years, for better or worse. Usually worse.

As far as Steven A's recent comments, I'm not going to pretend to be an authority on the black vote like so many of you, but IMHO I think this is his response to the absolute vitriol he sees whenever a black voice out of the crowd identifies with the Republican party. Larry Elder, Thomas Sowell, Carson, Tim Scott, Mia Love. All immediately branded by their own communities as traitors, uncle Tom's, "house negro." etc. Without even getting into whether there is justification for this, how is that healthy or beneficial? Juan Williams' son was attack by some idiot at Vibe for not being black, and then when it was proven conclusively through the wonders of photography that he was black, he wasn't "black enough." How is that line of thinking not completely stupid? How about having a conversation and debating issues before settling race and genetics.

Also, not for nothing but the starting point to this conversation for some of you was "Republicans are racist!" Not really an objective starting place.

On another topic, a former constitutional law professor is talking about how the mandatory vote would be a great idea. I mean it's easy to blur the lines sometimes when rights aren't enumerated, but unfortunately, I think LIBERTY happens to be spelled out pretty clearly.  The right to vote or not vote is pretty central to that idea one would think.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2015, 09:59:58 AM
Why should Republicans bother trying to get the black vote if it's only worth three fifths
And they don't vote
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 20, 2015, 10:02:58 AM
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-suggests-mandatory-voting-might-be-a-good-idea/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 20, 2015, 10:08:22 AM

On another topic, a former constitutional law professor is talking about how the mandatory vote would be a great idea. I mean it's easy to blur the lines sometimes when rights aren't enumerated, but unfortunately, I think LIBERTY happens to be spelled out pretty clearly.  The right to vote or not vote is pretty central to that idea one would think.



You folks are really big into talking about your rights, but I hear far less mention of responsibilities. The two go hand in hand - you want more of one, you have to shoulder more of the other.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2015, 10:08:39 AM
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/obama-suggests-mandatory-voting-might-be-a-good-idea/
Shocker

Maybe it should be mandatory for people who are on welfare to get jobs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2015, 10:32:36 AM
Literally every one of these is a bullshit rationalization because your chosen President is under fire.

Stopped reading here.  When Rush Limbaugh Jr. tells me my ideas are bullshit, I've already won.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2015, 10:41:08 AM
Stopped reading here.  When Rush Limbaugh Jr. tells me my ideas are bullshit, I've already won.
You realize that you're just as bad as people who listen/believe in Rush except on the other side of the aisle right?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 20, 2015, 10:42:07 AM
Shocker

Maybe it should be mandatory for people who are on welfare to get jobs.

It SHOULD be mandatory to mix the races, then they'll vote their hearts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2015, 10:46:52 AM
You realize that you're just as bad as people who listen/believe in Rush except on the other side of the aisle right?



When DCM thinks I'm a mouth breathing liberal, I have already won.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 20, 2015, 10:46:59 AM
Oh look a political thread devolving into my idea is better than your idea, who would have thunk it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 20, 2015, 10:53:05 AM
It SHOULD be mandatory to mix the races, then they'll vote their hearts.

I'm doing my part.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2015, 10:53:33 AM
I know this is a small microcosm, but I do find it interesting that out of this entire group (JO) of middle to upper middle income educated white males, there are only a handful of republicans.  It probably doesn't mean anything, but I still find it interesting.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 20, 2015, 10:54:08 AM
Upper middle income? I wish.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2015, 10:54:31 AM
I'm doing my part.

Ditto.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 20, 2015, 10:55:33 AM
Oh look a political thread devolving into my idea is better than your idea, who would have thunk it.

#shitpols
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 20, 2015, 10:57:56 AM

I know this is a small microcosm, but I do find it interesting that out of this entire group (JO) of middle to upper middle income educated white males, there are only a handful of republicans.  It probably doesn't mean anything, but I still find it interesting.

I don't think there are many Democrats either.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2015, 10:59:33 AM
I don't think there are many Democrats either.

Fair enough, though it seems the vast majority are left leaning moderates.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 20, 2015, 11:02:35 AM
I know this is a small microcosm, but I do find it interesting that out of this entire group (JO) of middle to upper middle income educated white males, there are only a handful of republicans.  It probably doesn't mean anything, but I still find it interesting.

We are all smart enough to figure out it's better to pick and choose where you stand on issues rather than have a blanket policy on excrement because the "party" tells us too.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 20, 2015, 11:12:35 AM
You folks are really big into talking about your rights, but I hear far less mention of responsibilities. The two go hand in hand - you want more of one, you have to shoulder more of the other.

I don't think you realize how applicable to the American left this actually is with the abortion debate being a prime example.  I completely agree that a state has no business telling a mother that she has to carry a baby to term pre-viability. But have you ever actually read a Planned Parenthood brief? Holy freaking excrement. ABORTIONS FOR ALL WHEREVER AND WHENEVER.

Stopped reading here.  When Rush Limbaugh Jr. tells me my ideas are bullshit, I've already won.

Yes I'm Rush Limbaugh Jr. for pointing out your rationalization in one instance and condemnation of the same thing in the other is based on nothing besides partisan politics and your boner for the current President. Got it.

I actually don't even know what station Rush is on. I thought it was 770.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 20, 2015, 11:16:58 AM
I'm doing my part.

You're a pioneer. Godspeed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 20, 2015, 11:18:01 AM
Upper middle income? I wish.

Same. Struggling Middle Class represent!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 20, 2015, 11:26:33 AM
Same. Struggling Middle Class represent!!

So broke I'm on Medicaid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 20, 2015, 11:37:00 AM
It SHOULD be mandatory to mix the races, then they'll vote their hearts.
I vote with my farts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on March 20, 2015, 12:43:20 PM
Oh look a political thread devolving into my idea is better than your idea, who would have thunk it.

Everyone on this board is a smug freak about politics? Well, color me shocked
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2015, 01:11:36 PM
Yes I'm Rush Limbaugh Jr. for pointing out your rationalization in one instance and condemnation of the same thing in the other is based on nothing besides partisan politics and your boner for the current President. Got it.

OK.  Again, don't give a excrement about what happened 25 years ago.  May as well be discussing the politics of Mars with that.

So to break it down in this century...  According to you, Nancy Palosi (3rd in line to the presidency at the time) visiting the Syrian president to promote peace with Israel is just as bad as a few dozen congressmen signing a letter to the leader of Iran saying "Don't worry, we have no intention of doing what our president says."

Sure, that makes total sense to me now.  Now let me run off and rub one out for the president that I have never had a problem criticizing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2015, 03:40:50 PM
Fair enough, though it seems the vast majority are left leaning moderates.
Please pull up the threads about Ferguson, minimum wage/McDonald's, or affirmative action and college. This boards a bunch of far left liberals.

 

I don't think there are many Democrats either.
Democrats not so much because I understand that has a party affiliation, liberals absolutely.

Someone would have to be smoking some good crack to disagree that the bulk of this board is more than left of center.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 20, 2015, 03:43:47 PM
Please pull up the threads about Ferguson or minimum wage. This boards a bunch of far left liberals. Democrats not so much, liberals absolutely.

Someone would have to disagree that the bulk of this board is more than left of center.

You are wrong

DCM mode engaged:

5 years ago, would you have traded Woody Johnson's nipple hair for Ruper Murdoch's cum?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 20, 2015, 03:58:02 PM
You are wrong

DCM mode engaged:

5 years ago, would you have traded Woody Johnson's nipple hair for Ruper Murdoch's cum?


DCM Mode engaged:

Yes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on March 20, 2015, 04:00:31 PM
Please pull up the threads about Ferguson, minimum wage/McDonald's, or affirmative action and college. This boards a bunch of far left liberals.

It's really incredible that you're genuinely convinced that this is true. I'm fascinated by what you'd interpret actual 'far left liberalism' to look like.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2015, 04:01:24 PM
It's really incredible that you're genuinely convinced that this is true. I'm fascinated by what you'd interpret actual 'far left liberalism' to look like.
Supporting 15$ minimum wage makes you a loon
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 20, 2015, 04:06:01 PM
I think the majority here are libertarian. But you have more far left nutcases (JE, Fen, Alio) than those who are on the further right side of the fence.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 20, 2015, 04:09:36 PM
JE might be the most "Liberal" here. He lives in a different more liberal country, so he of course has a different slant on things, go figure.

The rest of us pick and choose which side to be on based on individual merits. Again there's no blanket Republican or Democrat slant, we make up our own minds.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on March 20, 2015, 04:11:24 PM
Supporting 15$ minimum wage makes you a loon
My actual post from your minimum wage thread:
"I don't think so, but having a situation in which you can work your derriere off full-time and make 15 grand a year is ridiculous.

There isn't one single solution to the problem of under-educated people who grow up in poverty and continue to be poor, but forcing them to get government subsidies to feed themselves while working full-time is dumb."

Translated to DCM mode:

"Blah blah blah federal minimum wage should be $15."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2015, 05:11:33 PM
I think the majority here are libertarian. But you have more far left nutcases (JE, Fen, Alio) than those who are on the further right side of the fence.

JE is JE, but Alio and I are certainly not 'far left nutcases'.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2015, 05:21:27 PM
JE is JE, but Alio and I are certainly not 'far left nutcases'.
Didn't you say you thought MSNBC and Rachel Maddox are unbiased and nothing like Fox for the left?

Or something in that ballpark. It's possible it was one of the other ledtys who said it, but I'm almost sure it was you

If that's not drinking the koolaid, then Pucks got a bridge for you
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2015, 06:15:02 PM
Didn't you say you thought MSNBC and Rachel Maddox are unbiased and nothing like Fox for the left?

Or something in that ballpark. It's possible it was one of the other ledtys who said it, but I'm almost sure it was you

If that's not drinking the koolaid, then Pucks got a bridge for you


There are a couple crazies on MSNBC like Ed Shultz and Al Sharpton, and while they may pick and choose the facts to present in an extremely biased manner, I have never heard a flat out lie come from their mouths, though I try not to watch them.

I certainly never said that RM was 'unbiased'.  However, she tells the whole story and doesn't just make excrement up.  Multiple 'reporters' on Fox just plain make excrement up, or lie with a smile on their face.

There is a difference between telling a story with a liberal or conservative spin.  Lying or making excrement up is an entirely different matter.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2015, 06:20:47 PM
There are a couple crazies on MSNBC like Ed Shultz and Al Sharpton, and while they may pick and choose the facts to present in an extremely biased manner, I have never heard a flat out lie come from their mouths, though I try not to watch them.

I certainly never said that RM was 'unbiased'.  However, she tells the whole story and doesn't just make excrement up.  Multiple 'reporters' on Fox just plain make excrement up, or lie with a smile on their face.

There is a difference between telling a story with a liberal or conservative spin.  Lying or making excrement up is an entirely different matter.
Pew disagrees with you

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2013/03/18/pew-study-finds-msnbc-the-most-opinionated-cable-news-channel-by-far/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 20, 2015, 06:21:21 PM

Pew disagrees with you

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffbercovici/2013/03/18/pew-study-finds-msnbc-the-most-opinionated-cable-news-channel-by-far/

Yeah but still
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2015, 06:32:13 PM
There was also the whole MSNBC editing the Trayvon Martin tapes which probably was one of the biggest lies out there.

Let's not forget  Brian Williams either.

MSNBC lies just as much as any other channels, probably more so
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 20, 2015, 06:50:31 PM
Please pull up the threads about Ferguson, minimum wage/McDonald's, or affirmative action and college. This boards a bunch of far left liberals.

Democrats not so much because I understand that has a party affiliation, liberals absolutely.

Someone would have to be smoking some good crack to disagree that the bulk of this board is more than left of center.

I just pulled up the McDonalds minimum wage thread.  It was what I expected: a bunch of people arguing with you because your posts were freaking stupid, not because they believe in a $15/hr wage.  In fact, most people who argued with you started by saying "I don't agree with $15/hr but..."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 20, 2015, 06:54:23 PM
RM definitely doesn't tell the whole story. She tells the whole story as it fits her narrative.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2015, 06:58:04 PM
I just pulled up the McDonalds minimum wage thread.  It was what I expected: a bunch of people arguing with you because your posts were freaking stupid, not because they believe in a $15/hr wage.  In fact, most people who argued with you started by saying "I don't agree with $15/hr but..."
Fair point

I guess I didn't remember that thread too well
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 20, 2015, 06:59:41 PM
Aside from the obvious gulf in political leanings, the biggest difference between MSNBC and Fox News is that the people behind FNC are infinitely better at their jobs.  Say what you will about Bill O'Reilly's politics, I don't see how anyone can argue that he's not freaking brilliant at what he does.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2015, 08:58:03 PM
RM definitely doesn't tell the whole story. She tells the whole story as it fits her narrative.

I'm not denying that she fits a certain narrative, but she still tells the truth.  Not really worth debating.

Aside from the obvious gulf in political leanings, the biggest difference between MSNBC and Fox News is that the people behind FNC are infinitely better at their jobs.  Say what you will about Bill O'Reilly's politics, I don't see how anyone can argue that he's not freaking brilliant at what he does.

He's the best liar of the bunch.  He has the balls to put the lies on a board next to his face (because having it written down has to make it true).  He's brilliant at what he does for sure.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 20, 2015, 09:13:40 PM
Aside from the obvious gulf in political leanings, the biggest difference between MSNBC and Fox News is that the people behind FNC are infinitely better at their jobs.  Say what you will about Bill O'Reilly's politics, I don't see how anyone can argue that he's not freaking brilliant at what he does.

Their ability to control language is absolutely phenomenal.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2015, 09:20:13 PM
I'm not denying that she fits a certain narrative, but she still tells the truth.  Not really worth debating.

He's the best liar of the bunch.  He has the balls to put the lies on a board next to his face (because having it written down has to make it true).  He's brilliant at what he does for sure.
I thought Obama was the best liar of the bunch.

Even better than Clinton and Bush
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 20, 2015, 09:24:20 PM

I'm not denying that she fits a certain narrative, but she still tells the truth.  Not really worth debating.

He's the best liar of the bunch.  He has the balls to put the lies on a board next to his face (because having it written down has to make it true).  He's brilliant at what he does for sure.

No.  Not what I'm saying at all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2015, 09:55:05 PM
No.  Not what I'm saying at all.
It's ok he's a left leaning moderate.

He wrote it on a message board, it must be true
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 20, 2015, 10:01:40 PM
I thought Obama was the best liar of the bunch.

Even better than Clinton and Bush

Nah Bush was the best. Didn't let a national tragedy go to waste. Got a war out of it and the perfect business model for defense companies - an enemy that doesn't die because their beliefs are so strong they'll never quit, therefore there will be constant war with a religious zeal unmoved by violence and death. If I'm Lockheed Martin, Boeing, an Oil company, the Bush administration is equivalent to our Weeb Ewbank and Joe Namath.

The American government has been center right since the 80s, and your blindness and youthful ignorance has blinded you to the fact that those with slightly more moderate views than yourself have been running the country since you were born. If you actually had your own opinions and learned something, you'd know this. But you're a fox news puppet, so you know literally nothing.

If you bring up a social issue, then you truly don't understand that the sky is blue.

Keep on keepin on, brother.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2015, 10:06:12 PM
Nah Bush was the best. Didn't let a national tragedy go to waste. Got a war out of it and the perfect business model for defense companies - an enemy that doesn't die because their beliefs are so strong they'll never quit, therefore there will be constant war with a religious zeal unmoved by violence and death. If I'm Lockheed Martin, Boeing, an Oil company, the Bush administration is equivalent to our Weeb Ewbank and Joe Namath.

The American government has been center right since the 80s, and your blindness and youthful ignorance has blinded you to the fact that those with slightly more moderate views than yourself have been running the country since you were born. If you actually had your own opinions and learned something, you'd know this. But you're a fox news puppet, so you know literally nothing.

If you bring up a social issue, then you truly don't understand that the sky is blue.

Keep on keepin on, brother.

Congress voted to go to war.

And the excrement about war being about business or whatever is some crazy far left conspiracy excrement.

I don't even watch Fox News, and definitely completely disagree with the right on social issues.

I'm essentially pro business, and don't really care much about all the rest
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 20, 2015, 10:38:04 PM
Congress voted to go to war.

And the excrement about war being about business or whatever is some crazy far left conspiracy excrement.

I don't even watch Fox News, and definitely completely disagree with the right on social issues.

I'm essentially pro business, and don't really care much about all the rest


You know nothing but business? I suggest you become a more well rounded person.

And who said anything about conspiracies? Look at it objectively. It's a great business model.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2015, 10:42:29 PM
You know nothing but business? I suggest you become a more well rounded person.

And who said anything about conspiracies? Look at it objectively. It's a great business model.
No, I said I only care about the government creating ideal economic conditions for businesses to flourish.

Having a strong gdp, low unemployment, favorable tax rates, and conditions where businesses can grow is what I want from the government.

People are better off taking education healthcare etc in their own hands.

Looking at it objectively only congress can declare war. So unless it was some wild conspiracy involving the white house and congress I'd imagine that theory is nonsense.

Is big government all about nepotism with contracts absofuckinglutely

Bush did it, Obama did/does it they all do.

But to suggest they'd start a war, and nobody would ever find out is absurd.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 20, 2015, 11:24:42 PM
No, I said I only care about the government creating ideal economic conditions for businesses to flourish.

Having a strong gdp, low unemployment, favorable tax rates, and conditions where businesses can grow is what I want from the government.

People are better off taking education healthcare etc in their own hands.

Looking at it objectively only congress can declare war. So unless it was some wild conspiracy involving the white house and congress I'd imagine that theory is nonsense.

Is big government all about nepotism with contracts absofuckinglutely

Bush did it, Obama did/does it they all do.

But to suggest they'd start a war, and nobody would ever find out is absurd.


Businesses are flourishing since the turn of the century. Record profits year over year. Capitalism works.

Unemployment is at 5.5%

Only congress can declare war, correct.

Once again, for the cheap seats, is the situation going on the middle east not a wonderful model where the customer continues to grow for the product? I'm not talking about who started the war, or why. I'm talking about the now. Today. This moment. Is it not great for businesses in the war industry? I think it is. I think they've got a great situation on there hands, because there is no endgame is sight.

What conspiracies are you talking about, when I'm talking about the current state of business overseas?

I give up. The moon landing was fake.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 20, 2015, 11:40:52 PM

Congress voted to go to war.

And the excrement about war being about business or whatever is some crazy far left conspiracy excrement.

I don't even watch Fox News, and definitely completely disagree with the right on social issues.

I'm essentially pro business, and don't really care much about all the rest

TIL Eisenhower was a leftist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 20, 2015, 11:44:43 PM
TIL Eisenhower was a leftist.

Pinko commie.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 21, 2015, 09:31:30 AM
Supporting 15$ minimum wage makes you a loon

Like the entire city of Seattle.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 21, 2015, 09:31:58 AM
Like the entire city of Seattle.
They throw from the 1 yard line, they are loons
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 21, 2015, 09:36:22 AM
They throw from the 1 yard line, they are loons

Fair point well made.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 23, 2015, 08:52:12 PM
http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2015/03/awkward-watch-as-florida-lawmaker-mocks-rick-scott-official-for-refusing-to-say-climate-change/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 23, 2015, 09:23:35 PM
I just fuckn hate the term "climate change". It automatically assumes that any change in climate is a bad thing, rather than natural.

"We must stop climate change!" Wtf does that even mean?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 23, 2015, 09:32:16 PM

I just fuckn hate the term "climate change". It automatically assumes that any change in climate is a bad thing, rather than natural.

"We must stop climate change!" Wtf does that even mean?

Straw man
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 23, 2015, 09:42:01 PM
I just fuckn hate the term "climate change". It automatically assumes that any change in climate is a bad thing, rather than natural.

"We must stop climate change!" Wtf does that even mean?

It means say goodbye to the tip of Florida's penis.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 23, 2015, 10:47:11 PM

I just fuckn hate the term "climate change". It automatically assumes that any change in climate is a bad thing, rather than natural.

"We must stop climate change!" Wtf does that even mean?

Ok, what would you rather call it?  People have a hard enough time with the term climate change.  Calling it "detrimental variations in local climates that are man made in nature" might make them more confused.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 23, 2015, 10:59:47 PM

Ok, what would you rather call it?  People have a hard enough time with the term climate change.  Calling it "detrimental variations in local climates that are man made in nature" might make them more confused.

The funny thing is the term climate change was popularized by people who wanted to downplay the concept because global warming sounded too scary. Climate change is a euphemism.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 24, 2015, 08:53:51 AM
The funny thing is the term climate change was popularized by people who wanted to downplay the concept because global warming sounded too scary. Climate change is a euphemism.

Let's combine them to make another euphemism.

Warming Change.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 24, 2015, 12:18:46 PM
TIL Eisenhower was a leftist.

TIL I am a far left loon.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 24, 2015, 01:48:42 PM
TIL I am a far left loon.

Well with all due respect, Fenwyr likes Boston a whole lot more than New York, you got confused for that loon.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 24, 2015, 02:05:23 PM

TIL I am a far left loon.

Weren't you all about creating more low income housing in Manhattan? That's far left looney speak.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 24, 2015, 04:02:55 PM
Weren't you all about creating more low income housing in Manhattan? That's far left looney speak.

Being left of you could still leave me on the right hand side of the aisle. I certainly lean left, but not nearly to the degree you lean right.

But I guess you're right. I don't hate poor people. I'm clearly a far leftist loony.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 26, 2015, 03:11:19 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/indiana-gov-pence-set-sign-religious-objections-bill-050305160.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 26, 2015, 03:36:21 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/indiana-gov-pence-set-sign-religious-objections-bill-050305160.html

The majority of my Twitter stream today has been about this. More than half the people I follow are gamers who attend GenCon, who are threatening to take their convention out of the state.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 26, 2015, 03:47:12 PM
http://news.yahoo.com/indiana-gov-pence-set-sign-religious-objections-bill-050305160.html

Would this allow a business owner to ban christians from their establishment?  Not even joking...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 26, 2015, 08:39:19 PM
freak Indiana. I hope everyone boycotts that state. What a disgraceful bill.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on March 26, 2015, 08:44:24 PM
Would this allow a business owner to ban christians from their establishment?  Not even joking...

Episcopalians need not apply
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 27, 2015, 10:30:39 AM
freak Indiana. I hope everyone boycotts that state. What a disgraceful bill.

Salesforce have already banned any corporate travel to the state and Yelp have said that they will pull out also.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 29, 2015, 04:55:11 PM
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAWOOHOOHOOHOOHOOHOOOHOOOOOOTELLMETHISISAJOKEBECAUSEITSFUCKINGHILARIOUS!!!!!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/29/carly-fiorina-presidential-campaign_n_6964340.html

One of the worst CEOs in NASDAQ history and she wants to run for the Presidency based upon her private sector experience? There's hubris, and then there's..... this. Do we even have a word for what this is? Uberhubris? Amazing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 29, 2015, 07:39:37 PM
AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAWOOHOOHOOHOOHOOHOOOHOOOOOOTELLMETHISISAJOKEBECAUSEITSFUCKINGHILARIOUS!!!!!!

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2015/03/29/carly-fiorina-presidential-campaign_n_6964340.html

One of the worst CEOs in NASDAQ history and she wants to run for the Presidency based upon her private sector experience? There's hubris, and then there's..... this. Do we even have a word for what this is? Uberhubris? Amazing.
I  don't think she was nearly as bad as you think she was at ceo. She just took over HP at the wrong time, and Apple and Android are two of the most successful businesses of all time. Losing to them isn't that bad

Hell even Microsoft is getting its derriere kicked by those two, and it's also one of the most successful companies of all time.

I strongly doubt she gets a presidential bid, but I think she's a serious VP contender.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 29, 2015, 08:14:34 PM
DCM, dude. This is my industry. Trust me when I tell you that Carly Fiorina is a laughing stock in the tech sector. Her leadership of HP was disastrous, and the fact that you bring up Apple and Android as reasons why her performance should be in any way excused demonstrates all we need to know about your non-existent understanding of what she did (and didn't do).

Wall Street hates her. There's no way she's going to get the nomination, but it's freaking hilarious that she thinks her private sector experience is a selling point in doing so. I hope she does though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 30, 2015, 12:01:52 AM
I agree that we need more people with private sector experience running for office, but she's definitely not one of them. A combination of both is best. You need to know how to play the game to be an effective president.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 30, 2015, 12:13:04 AM

I agree that we need more people with private sector experience running for office, but she's definitely not one of them. A combination of both is best. You need to know how to play the game to be an effective president.

Why do you hate women?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 30, 2015, 03:51:33 PM
Gay Nazis

https://youtu.be/9AIN2jNsadA
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 30, 2015, 06:08:59 PM
Gay Nazis

https://youtu.be/9AIN2jNsadA

Petrozza's idol, Ernst Roehm, Hitler's boyfriend. I think he had posters of him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 01, 2015, 12:37:22 PM
"Big Gay"? Really?

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2015/03/bryan-fischer-indiana-law
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on April 01, 2015, 12:39:19 PM
"Big Gay"? Really?

http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2015/03/bryan-fischer-indiana-law

Just wait until the requirement for entering a gay comedy club is swallowing a two load minimum.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 01, 2015, 12:44:03 PM
I wish everyone would just shut the freak up about the gay thing. I'm tired of both sides. Let them marry so we can stop hearing about "gay rights" etc.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 01, 2015, 02:47:47 PM
NSFW

http://memoriespizza.com/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 01, 2015, 05:33:24 PM
Guess we're not planning to get sensible with the rhetoric any time soon then.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CBiiJriUAAABU0L.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on April 01, 2015, 09:51:30 PM
oh good lord
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 01, 2015, 10:07:09 PM
NSFW

http://memoriespizza.com/

Do these people not realize that they're criticizing people based on their religious beliefs? Intolerance being met with intolerance is always the way to go.

Bachmann is a stupid queynte, but she's a useless stupid queynte. Nothing like the former Senate Leader admitting to a lie to sway an election today. Bachmann and Reid...lol. Two birds of a different feather for sure, but I'll have to contact their parents if I ever need the blueprints to build myself an poopchute.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on April 01, 2015, 10:23:14 PM
Guess we're not planning to get sensible with the rhetoric any time soon then.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/CBiiJriUAAABU0L.png)

She doesn't even use quotes at the very end? What a horrible person.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 01, 2015, 10:29:16 PM

Do these people not realize that they're criticizing people based on their religious beliefs? Intolerance being met with intolerance is always the way to go.

Prrrrrrrrrrrrrrrt
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on April 01, 2015, 10:38:36 PM
I swear, the religious freedom religious persecution fight has to be the biggest clusterfuck of idiocy I've ever seen.

They can't even produce a good example of this excrement mattering in practice.  Oh, a pizza place weighs in on not catering gay weddings?  YOU ARE A freaking PIZZA PLACE.  LET US KNOW WHEN YOU ARE ASKED TO CATER A GAY FIVE YEAR OLD'S BIRTHDAY PARTY.  Nobody wants you to cater their wedding.

And the backlash?  Again, IT IS A freaking PIZZA PLACE.  ARE YOU SERIOUSLY AFFECTED BY THE DECISION NOT TO CATER YOUR GAY WEDDING?

This is not massive groups of people ACTUALLY being turned away from lunch counters because of who they are. This is a bunch of irrelevant idiots expressing fear that they MIGHT be asked to provide services for a niche within a niche market.  Then it's a bunch of people in that niche up in arms that in this hypothetical scenario that NO ONE SEEMS TO HAVE ACTUALLY SEEN IN EXISTENCE, they will be denied service by that one little bakery they had never heard of until the gay wedding argument.

And now we have huge swaths of people freaking out on both sides about what it all means.  I'll tell you what it means: jack excrement.  Legalizing gay marriage?  Big important deal.  Worrying about whether someone you hate will ask you to perform a service for the wedding?  Or whether someone who hates you will refuse to perform that service?  No.  You're all idiots.

I'm glad people are boycotting the places that do this.  Keep not spending your money there.  Hacking a freaking website to make some stupid point that just widens the divide?  Don't whine when the uber-Christians don't suddenly see the light.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 02, 2015, 02:11:29 AM
Prrrrrrrrrrrrrrrt

Sorry if IJS just put it more eloquently then I, but whatever.

These people are idiots, but is hacking their site or threatening them a smart way to get your point across? Does Tim Cook not look like an poopchute when he says he's going to boycott Indiana and then does business with Saudi Arabia? How gay friendly is that country?!

Let the freaking free market does what it does best. If people want to be idiotic and use their religious freedom as an excuse to discriminate,  let them miss out on the financial benefit. Not
for nothing but why would someone want someone with objections providing a service anyway?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Cane on April 02, 2015, 04:18:10 AM

Prrrrrrrrrrrrrrrt

#shitpost
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 02, 2015, 07:10:36 AM
Sorry if IJS just put it more eloquently then I, but whatever.

They're not practicing their religious beliefs, they're just dressing up their bigotry.

I wouldn't consider you and IJR to be quite on the same page here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 02, 2015, 08:17:12 AM
They're not practicing their religious beliefs, they're just dressing up their bigotry.

I wouldn't consider you and IJR to be quite on the same page here.

That's your POV. You can disagree all you want, but they have a religious basis for their beliefs, and in this country the last time I checked you have a fundamental right to believe what you want as freaking warped or stupid as it may be. Once people are made aware , they have the right to shop elsewhere. This is so much easier then people make it out to be. There was no religious basis for segregation. Unfortunately, despite also the "love thy neighbor" stuff these people chose to entrench themselves in douchebaggery on the basis of religious text.

He articulated it way better than I,  but I gathered from his post that in the name of being outraged everyone's being a stupid excrement in this situation.

I was talking to my cousin yesterday and I said. "If you knew a business that engaged in such a practice, why would you look to use them?" Direct response: " I have no freaking clue."  My cousin should have the right to marry his boyfriend and those working on the occasion should be invested into doing the best job they can, not dragged into it kicking and screaming because of legislation.


A part of this is the continued crusade by the militant part of that community , Dan Savage types,  to shove their righteousness down people's throats.

Pizza is almost as abundant as freaking water. I'm sure there are 10 other establishments they would've been happy to cater a gay wedding.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 02, 2015, 09:00:40 AM
That's your POV. You can disagree all you want, but they have a religious basis for their beliefs, and in this country the last time I checked you have a fundamental right to believe what you want as freaking warped or stupid as it may be.

I think 18 years of Lutheran, Methodist, and Catholic upbringing gave me sufficient insight into this. I've never met a person who claimed "it's against my beliefs" who didn't just have a personal issue with gay people.


Once people are made aware , they have the right to shop elsewhere. This is so much easier then people make it out to be. There was no religious basis for segregation. Unfortunately, despite also the "love thy neighbor" stuff these people chose to entrench themselves in douchebaggery on the basis of religious text.

That's exactly what will happen. If they're getting bombarded now, it's just accelerating the inevitable.

I was talking to my cousin yesterday and I said. "If you knew a business that engaged in such a practice, why would you look to use them?" Direct response: " I have no freaking clue."  My cousin should have the right to marry his boyfriend and those working on the occasion should be invested into doing the best job they can, not dragged into it kicking and screaming because of legislation.

This doesn't have to happen, because there are countless ways to get out of providing your goods or services without feigning moral objection. These people act like the gaystapo are going to kick down their door and force them to perform gaybortions or else they'll be sentenced to a hearing by one of Obama's gay death panels.

A part of this is the continued crusade by the militant part of that community , Dan Savage types, to shove their righteousness down people's throats.

This righteousness didn't form in a vacuum. It's a response to the Santorum of the world being shoved down people's throats.

Pizza is almost as abundant as freaking water. I'm sure there are 10 other establishments they would've been happy to cater a gay wedding.

As IJR said, fat chance of a gay couple enlisting the services of a pizzeria (in INDIANA) to cater their wedding. It's a ridiculous hypothetical.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 02, 2015, 09:14:24 AM
As IJR said, fat chance of a gay couple enlisting the services of a pizzeria (in INDIANA) to cater their wedding. It's a ridiculous hypothetical.

I can see a gay couple in Manitoba enlisting the services of a pizzeria to cater their wedding.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 02, 2015, 09:17:06 AM
I can see a gay couple in Manitoba enlisting the services of a pizzeria to cater their wedding.

*Krautzeria
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 02, 2015, 09:25:56 AM
Hai gaiz!  We still talking about Walmart in here or is it Republican retards?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 02, 2015, 09:30:05 AM
Hai gaiz!  We still talking about Walmart in here or is it Republican retards?

We're talking about Big Gay forcing small Christian-owned businesses to pay illegal Mexicans a $30/hr minimum wage.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 02, 2015, 09:43:07 AM
We're talking about Big Gay forcing small Christian-owned businesses to pay illegal Mexicans a $30/hr minimum wage.

Damn Mexicans........
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 02, 2015, 01:04:07 PM
I just saw "Gaystopo" and "Thank you Obummer" used unironically in a Facebook comment.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on April 02, 2015, 03:42:44 PM
That's your POV. You can disagree all you want, but they have a religious basis for their beliefs, and in this country the last time I checked you have a fundamental right to believe what you want as freaking warped or stupid as it may be. Once people are made aware , they have the right to shop elsewhere. This is so much easier then people make it out to be. There was no religious basis for segregation. Unfortunately, despite also the "love thy neighbor" stuff these people chose to entrench themselves in douchebaggery on the basis of religious text.

No.  Institutional bias against gays is wrong.  It has absolutely nothing to do with the religious aspect.  In fact, there WAS religious basis for segregation.  Religion was used to justify slavery for ages, and it was then used to justify subjugation and separation.  Anti-miscegenation laws were based in the bible.  The same liberal (different meaning) interpretation was used there as it is against gay marriage.  "Traditionally", blacks and whites didn't interact or marry.

The difference between that segregation and this one is that there aren't "No Gays Allowed" signs in restaurant windows, separate bathrooms and other facilities, and separate sections for gays in venues and transportation.  Like I said, institutional bias is essentially wiped out by the legalization of gay marriage.

Having said that, no you cannot refuse service based on sexual orientation.  It's bullshit, and it's unlawful.  I just haven't seen an abundance of REAL instances of it happening.  That's my point.  Nobody gives a freak what someone hypothetically argues.  OH MY GOD, I MIGHT ONE DAY HAVE A GAY CUSTOMER WHAT DO I DOOOOOOOO?  People are going to refuse the business, and someone might sue.  Until it starts happening widely, I'm not going to get all up in arms.

Quote
He articulated it way better than I,  but I gathered from his post that in the name of being outraged everyone's being a stupid excrement in this situation.

I was talking to my cousin yesterday and I said. "If you knew a business that engaged in such a practice, why would you look to use them?" Direct response: " I have no freaking clue."  My cousin should have the right to marry his boyfriend and those working on the occasion should be invested into doing the best job they can, not dragged into it kicking and screaming because of legislation.

Again, it's only when it becomes a huge problem that there will even be legislation.  I'm not suggesting I oppose enforcement of anti-discrimination laws in this case.  If it becomes a real problem, I sure as hell hope people get forced to conduct business without discrimination.  I just don't think it will ever come to that, and it sure hasn't to this point.  People are pissed on principle, not practice.

Quote
A part of this is the continued crusade by the militant part of that community , Dan Savage types,  to shove their righteousness down people's throats.

There's absolutely no way you can blame Big Gay and not Big Christian.  freaking religion is shoved down our throats, but you're not complaining about that.  I live in a super secular community, and my kids still say the Pledge every day and most people say "Under God".  And yet I keep reading these people flipping their excrement about how God is being forced out of schools and no one says the pledge any more.  I hear about how Christians are an acceptable persecuted group, and yet I don't see any of that excrement.  It's all MOAR GOD MOAR GOD WE ARE LOSING GOD WHERE IS GOD?  Shove shove shove.  There is no more militant group in this country than Evangelicals.  None.  They freaking predominate, and even when a leader is a Dem, good luck saying you're not a Christian without a massive backlash and ouster from office.  They rewrite history to say this is a Christian country, that the Pledge was always religious, and that our money always said In God We Trust.  You're right, though, militant gays are the real problem.

Quote
Pizza is almost as abundant as freaking water. I'm sure there are 10 other establishments they would've been happy to cater a gay wedding.

Nobody asked the pizza place to begin with.  That's why the whole thing is freaking stupid.  Stupid hypotheticals that simply aren't coming true.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on April 02, 2015, 03:44:03 PM
I just saw "Gaystopo" and "Thank you Obummer" used unironically in a Facebook comment.

It's a shame there are no gay communities, gay bars, and such.  Just gays trying to make everything in the freaking country gay.  It's not like they actively seek out other people like them instead of demanding the whole world turn gay to suit them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 02, 2015, 04:11:50 PM
Nobody asked the pizza place to begin with.  That's why the whole thing is freaking stupid.  Stupid hypotheticals that simply aren't coming true.

http://kissingsuzykolber.uproxx.com/2015/04/midwestern-pizza-fans-react-completely-reasonably.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Murrell2878 on April 02, 2015, 08:24:32 PM
All of a sudden I want pizza tonight.... Does that make me gay? I'm so confused
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 02, 2015, 08:33:50 PM
If me and Heismanberg have a gay pizza wedding who wants to come?

And would it be inappropriate for all the pies to have extra sausage
?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 02, 2015, 08:53:39 PM

All of a sudden I want pizza tonight.... Does that make me gay? I'm so confused

Only if it's a Hawaiian pizza.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on April 02, 2015, 09:18:25 PM

All of a sudden I want pizza tonight.... Does that make me gay? I'm so confused

You picked a hell of a time to surface.  It's like you sniffed out the pheromones.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on April 02, 2015, 09:26:34 PM


 There is no more militant group in this country than Evangelicals. 

White taliban. White freaking taliban.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 02, 2015, 10:48:38 PM
If me and Heismanberg have a gay pizza wedding who wants to come?

And would it be inappropriate for all the pies to have extra sausage
?

I'm not coming unless there's extra sausage, and yes, I do know how sig-worthy that statement is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 16, 2015, 12:12:36 AM
This is truly insane.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-04-15/bloomberg-politics-national-poll-finds-deep-partisan-split-on-israel-and-iran
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 16, 2015, 06:37:43 AM
This is truly insane.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-04-15/bloomberg-politics-national-poll-finds-deep-partisan-split-on-israel-and-iran
It's not that crazy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 16, 2015, 06:47:41 AM

This is truly insane.

http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-04-15/bloomberg-politics-national-poll-finds-deep-partisan-split-on-israel-and-iran

Does this really surprise you?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 16, 2015, 08:02:11 AM
Well it points to the glaring stupidity of being polarized along party lines:

1.) Lol sympathizing more for Netanyahu than Obama, we're Americans you freaking twats.

2.) Being optimistic in regards to anything Iran related, yeah with any Nuclear agreement, expect Iran to have the bomb in a few years. Are you freaking kidding me? I don't think they believe in the Easter Bunny and Santy Claus, freaking morons.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 16, 2015, 08:21:17 AM
It just goes to show that most people are nothing more than sheep who tow their party's line. Obama is optimistic? Well, I voted for him so I guess I have to be optimistic as well.

Also, if the opposite side agrees with something then you sure as hell cant hold that same position.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 22, 2015, 08:37:57 PM
http://time.com/3831645/mcconnell-patriot-act-surveillance-extension/

Kill yourself, Mitch
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 27, 2015, 06:12:11 PM
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/04/26/the-scholars-and-lawyers-who-believe-gay-marriage-causes-abortion.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 16, 2015, 11:34:37 AM
http://www.kansascity.com/news/government-politics/article20822424.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 16, 2015, 11:49:40 AM

http://www.kansascity.com/news/government-politics/article20822424.html

Oh that's just awesome. Imagine that, a career and possible marriage ruined over some young hoo-ha. She must've been something.

Btw judging by the time stamps it looks like she was taking screen shots of the texts as they were texting, and not just going back. Ha she knew what she was doing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on May 16, 2015, 04:26:52 PM

Oh that's just awesome. Imagine that, a career and possible marriage ruined over some young hoo-ha. She must've been something.

Btw judging by the time stamps it looks like she was taking screen shots of the texts as they were texting, and not just going back. Ha she knew what she was doing.

Yeah, why isn't anyone pointing that out?  I didn't even notice.  I guess he gets what he gets since the alternative would be him using his position of power to land a younger woman, but that's so conniving.  And she got them to maintain her privacy with her identity.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 16, 2015, 04:34:20 PM

Yeah, why isn't anyone pointing that out?  I didn't even notice.  I guess he gets what he gets since the alternative would be him using his position of power to land a younger woman, but that's so conniving.  And she got them to maintain her privacy with her identity.

Yeah, it's one thing to get caught in an affair thinking the girl was really into you, and another when the whole time she's been playing him hard core. That's gotta be the ultimate kick in the nuts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on May 16, 2015, 04:45:26 PM

Yeah, it's one thing to get caught in an affair thinking the girl was really into you, and another when the whole time she's been playing him hard core. That's gotta be the ultimate kick in the nuts.

I can only imagine what's going on in his head: "But...I was supposed to be playing you!  You're a woman!"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 16, 2015, 04:46:49 PM

I can only imagine what's going on in his head: "But...I was supposed to be playing you!  You're a woman!"

Nigga thought he was frank underwood.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 26, 2015, 10:49:03 AM
Heterosexual females REALLY like gay marriage
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 26, 2015, 10:56:56 AM

Heterosexual females REALLY like gay marriage

I was just gonna say. The women in my office are really excited about this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 26, 2015, 10:58:23 AM
I was just gonna say. The women in my office are really excited about this.

They just want you to be happy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 26, 2015, 10:59:12 AM

They just want you to be happy.

This guy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on June 26, 2015, 11:34:52 AM
Good.  We can now stop talking about gay marriage because it's settled properly and the right side won.

/wishfulthinking
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 26, 2015, 11:48:59 AM
Good.  We can now stop talking about gay marriage because it's settled properly and the right side won.

/wishfulthinking

From your lips to gods ears.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 26, 2015, 11:49:19 AM

Good.  We can now stop talking about gay marriage because it's settled properly and the right side won.

/wishfulthinking

As long as the government doesn't go after churchs forcing them to marry gay couples, I think the debate will fizzle.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on June 26, 2015, 11:51:09 AM
As long as the government doesn't go after churchs forcing them to marry gay couples, I think the debate will fizzle.

If it did, I'd be right there arguing on the side of the churches.  freak that noise.  The government doesn't force the church to marry people who aren't members of their church.  I see no reason why gay marriage would be the place to start, and none of the gay folks I know have any desire to get married in a hostile church.  There are always assholes, though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on June 26, 2015, 11:51:47 AM
As long as the government doesn't go after churchs forcing them to marry gay couples, I think the debate will fizzle.

I just realized you said Churchs, not churches.  I don't know why Church's Chicken would be forced to marry anyone.  You confuse me, Tommy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 26, 2015, 11:53:50 AM

If it did, I'd be right there arguing on the side of the churches.  freak that noise.  The government doesn't force the church to marry people who aren't members of their church.  I see no reason why gay marriage would be the place to start, and none of the gay folks I know have any desire to get married in a hostile church.  There are always assholes, though.

What if the two gay people are members of the same Catholic Church, and want to get married there. I think churches and religious institutions are protected otherwise mosques would face some gender discrimination suits.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 26, 2015, 11:58:16 AM
What if the two gay people are members of the same Catholic Church, and want to get married there. I think churches and religious institutions are protected otherwise mosques would face some gender discrimination suits.

I'm pretty sure a church can refuse to perform a wedding for any reason. My wife and I were denied solely on our age when we first tried (22 & 19). Though part of it was the unsaid "you're pregnant" too.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 26, 2015, 11:58:56 AM

I'm pretty sure a church can refuse to perform a wedding for any reason. My wife and I were denied solely on our age when we first tried (22 & 19). Though part of it was the unsaid "you're pregnant" too.

Damn. How did your wife get you pregnant?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on June 26, 2015, 12:06:23 PM
Damn. How did your wife get you pregnant?

Plot twist: Alio is a seahorse.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 26, 2015, 12:08:45 PM
Damn. How did your wife get you pregnant?

Pretty easily actually. See when a mommy and daddy love each other very much, and the mommy has a penis...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 26, 2015, 12:58:33 PM
From your lips to gods dong.

FYP
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 26, 2015, 01:02:40 PM
What if the two gay people are members of the same Catholic Church, and want to get married there. I think churches and religious institutions are protected otherwise mosques would face some gender discrimination suits.

This is actually a good point.

Let's make a deal with churches...  Give up your tax exempt status and you don't have to marry 2 of your gay members.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on June 26, 2015, 01:32:03 PM
This is actually a good point.

Let's make a deal with churches...  Give up your tax exempt status and you don't have to marry 2 of your gay members.

That threat is a horrendously bad idea.  This should be the impetus on both sides to fully extricate the church from the state and political influence.  That includes maintenance of tax exempt status.  This is one more way in which churches should want to separate themselves entirely.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 26, 2015, 01:32:51 PM
Love or hate the guy, but Obama is having the best week ever.

Apparently all us fags can get married now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 26, 2015, 01:33:58 PM
That threat is a horrendously bad idea.  This should be the impetus on both sides to fully extricate the church from the state and political influence.  That includes maintenance of tax exempt status.  This is one more way in which churches should want to separate themselves entirely.

They already have enormous political power, so I fail to see your point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on June 26, 2015, 01:44:54 PM

They already have enormous political power, so I fail to see your point.

...that was my point.  Your argument is that to fix the issue of churches interfering with politics and attempting to influence the government, we should force them to take part in gay marriage or remove their tax exempt status.  How in the world does that improve the situation?  Who does that benefit in any way?

With gay marriage now legal everywhere, and with zero chance of getting enough states to approve an amendment to the Constitution banning it, it's the time to use this as the impetus to remove churches from the political process.  Keep your tax exempt status and extricate yourself from the political process so you don't get muddied up by the taint of immorality as law.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 26, 2015, 01:46:30 PM
...that was my point.  Your argument is that to fix the issue of churches interfering with politics and attempting to influence the government, we should force them to take part in gay marriage or remove their tax exempt status.  How in the world does that improve the situation?  Who does that benefit in any way?

With gay marriage now legal everywhere, and with zero chance of getting enough states to approve an amendment to the Constitution banning it, it's the time to use this as the impetus to remove churches from the political process.  Keep your tax exempt status and extricate yourself from the political process so you don't get muddied up by the taint of immorality as law.

OK, that makes total sense now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 26, 2015, 02:55:43 PM
I feel like that was one of the main reasons the Christian conservatives became so influential in the Republican Party over the last 20 years. Gay marriage wasn't seriously considered before, so there was nothing besides abortion that Christian conservatives could scream about.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on June 26, 2015, 03:40:40 PM

I feel like that was one of the main reasons the Christian conservatives became so influential in the Republican Party over the last 20 years. Gay marriage wasn't seriously considered before, so there was nothing besides abortion that Christian conservatives could scream about.

You forgot willful ignorance and distrust of science.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 26, 2015, 03:45:40 PM
You forgot willful ignorance and distrust of science.

Gay marriage has already set the next natural disaster in motion.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 26, 2015, 03:53:04 PM

You forgot willful ignorance and distrust of science.

My point was that until gay marriage became an issue the Christian conservatives weren't as loud. The defense of marriage act was only signed 19 years ago with overwhelming support on both sides.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 26, 2015, 04:02:36 PM
My point was that until gay marriage became an issue the Christian conservatives weren't as loud. The defense of marriage act was only signed 19 years ago with overwhelming support on both sides.

I think the information age makes every group seem louder.

They were making a pretty big deal out of song lyrics in the '80s and '90s.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 26, 2015, 04:26:26 PM
I think the information age makes every group seem louder.

They were making a pretty big deal out of song lyrics in the '80s and '90s.

And saying kids who played D&D actively worshiped the devil and cast black magic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 26, 2015, 05:28:24 PM
And saying kids who played D&D actively worshiped the devil and cast black magic.

Yeah, what about it?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on June 26, 2015, 05:51:20 PM
Me and my girlfriend broke up, just in time for gay marriage to be legalized
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 26, 2015, 06:03:21 PM
Me and my girlfriend broke up, just in time for gay marriage to be legalized
Love wins.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 26, 2015, 06:20:16 PM

This is actually a good point.

Let's make a deal with churches...  Give up your tax exempt status and you don't have to marry 2 of your gay members.

Relevant http://www.nytimes.com/2015/06/25/us/schools-fear-impact-of-gay-marriage-ruling-on-tax-status.html?_r=0
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 26, 2015, 06:27:12 PM
(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/06/26/ad61565c12fb66f541190b0cd5eb84de.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 26, 2015, 06:28:33 PM
That guy has a sad life if he cares that much.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 26, 2015, 06:44:01 PM
I'm pretty sure a church can refuse to perform a wedding for any reason. My wife and I were denied solely on our age when we first tried (22 & 19). Though part of it was the unsaid "you're pregnant" too.

The catholic church we used probably wouldn't have married me and my wife if I wasn't baptized or if I wasn't pretending to still be a Methodist (we got in because she was baptized Catholic).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 26, 2015, 06:49:44 PM
Even my parents have accepted it and they're as old school and uneducated as you can get. My dad summed it up perfectly "They want it to happen more than I don't want it to happen, so whatever."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 26, 2015, 06:54:47 PM
(https://fbcdn-photos-g-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpt1/v/t1.0-0/11666232_947868021938260_8464783327595598118_n.jpg?efg=eyJpIjoidCJ9&oh=2fb5c7d53024596c27945c110bf37079&oe=561A4438&__gda__=1441289788_1f3d72be1836748e42351ef9bab4b39e)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 26, 2015, 07:20:29 PM

Good.  We can now stop talking about gay marriage because it's settled properly and the right side won.

/wishfulthinking
As long as the government doesn't go after churchs forcing them to marry gay couples, I think the debate will fizzle.

https://www.facebook.com/darkmatterpoetry/posts/858408744240044
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 26, 2015, 07:24:07 PM
Ugh
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 26, 2015, 09:05:47 PM
(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/06/26/49dc8a8dd63baa4abe107f24f6f1e6fa.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on June 27, 2015, 02:27:54 AM
What the freak was that dark matter excrement?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 27, 2015, 06:48:53 AM
Last one to change their Facebook profile picture into a rainbow hates gay marriage!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 27, 2015, 08:23:47 AM

Last one to change their Facebook profile picture into a rainbow hates gay marriage!!!

(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/06/27/04a410e9fe215f9994a79ac3a92735da.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on June 27, 2015, 08:52:10 AM

Last one to change their Facebook profile picture into a rainbow hates gay marriage!!!

That excrement's so gay.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 27, 2015, 08:59:30 AM
You're all faggots I hope you marry each other.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 27, 2015, 10:21:30 AM

(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/06/27/04a410e9fe215f9994a79ac3a92735da.jpg)

This is hilarious.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 27, 2015, 11:28:20 AM
(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/06/27/04a410e9fe215f9994a79ac3a92735da.jpg)

I'm pretty much dying to set this as my profile pic #loveislove #equality
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 29, 2015, 05:47:00 PM
loljews*

http://gawker.com/orthodox-jews-invent-uber-for-protesting-gay-pride-1714720843

*Autocorrect tried to change this to lol jets. freak you, Autocorrect.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on June 29, 2015, 08:39:35 PM
loljews*

http://gawker.com/orthodox-jews-invent-uber-for-protesting-gay-pride-1714720843

*Autocorrect tried to change this to lol jets. freak you, Autocorrect.


Quote
Heshie Freed, a member of the political action committee, an Orthodox Jewish group based in Brooklyn, said that [Mexicans] were supplementary troops, filling in for the Jewish students who would normally be called upon to demonstrate.

“The rabbis said that the yeshiva boys shouldn’t come out for this because of what they would see at the parade,” Mr. Freed said.

Oh my god
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on June 29, 2015, 11:39:22 PM
loljews*

http://gawker.com/orthodox-jews-invent-uber-for-protesting-gay-pride-1714720843

*Autocorrect tried to change this to lol jets. freak you, Autocorrect.



The leader goes home and rubs himself on his cat to the idea of a young man wanting to know more about the yeshiva, and what's in his underwear.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 30, 2015, 08:18:25 AM
It's always the yiddle in the middle.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 09, 2015, 09:34:22 PM
"The nature of politics is to subtract meaning from language, Swaim understands, but he develops a relatively benign philosophy about political speech: “Using vague, slippery or just meaningless language is not the same as lying: it’s not intended to deceive so much as to preserve options, buy time, distance oneself from others, or just to sound like you’re saying something instead of nothing.” And politicians resort to such devices not out of deviousness but simply because every day they must weigh in “on things of which they have little or no reliable knowledge or about which they just don’t care.”"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2015/07/08/what-its-like-to-write-speeches-for-a-rude-rambling-and-disgraced-politician/?tid=sm_fb
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 09, 2015, 09:37:52 PM
"The nature of politics is to subtract meaning from language, Swaim understands, but he develops a relatively benign philosophy about political speech: “Using vague, slippery or just meaningless language is not the same as lying: it’s not intended to deceive so much as to preserve options, buy time, distance oneself from others, or just to sound like you’re saying something instead of nothing.” And politicians resort to such devices not out of deviousness but simply because every day they must weigh in “on things of which they have little or no reliable knowledge or about which they just don’t care.”"

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/book-party/wp/2015/07/08/what-its-like-to-write-speeches-for-a-rude-rambling-and-disgraced-politician/?tid=sm_fb

Good quote.  The sad thing is that the general public has created this monster by jumping all over every minuscule comment any politician makes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 10, 2015, 11:45:18 AM
Quote
Sen. Dianne Feinstein blasted the San Francisco Sheriff's Department on Tuesday for releasing an illegal immigrant with a felony record, saying the woman he shot last week would still be alive if the department had notified federal immigration authorities.

Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, who had been deported five times, was freed in March even though Immigration and Custom Enforcement had filed a detainer request with the department.

Sen. Dianne Feinstein blasted the San Francisco Sheriff's Department on Tuesday for releasing an illegal immigrant with a felony record, saying the woman he shot last week would still be alive if the department had notified federal immigration authorities.

Juan Francisco Lopez-Sanchez, who had been deported five times, was freed in March even though Immigration and Custom Enforcement had filed a detainer request with the department.

He admitted Sunday to shooting and killing Kathryn Steinle, 32, but said it was an accident.

“The tragic death of Ms. Steinle could have been avoided if the Sheriff's Department had notified ICE prior to the release of Mr. Sanchez, which would have allowed ICE to remove him from the country,” Ms. Feinstein said in a letter to San Francisco Mayor Edwin M. Lee.

The sheriff's department has said that Lopez-Sanchez was released because ICE failed to produce an arrest warrant or judicial determination as required under San Francisco’s sanctuary city rules.

“I strongly believe that an undocumented individual, convicted of multiple felonies and with a detainer request from ICE, should not have been released,” Ms. Feinstein said. “We should focus on deporting convicted criminals, not setting them loose on our streets. As a member of the Judiciary Committee, I am looking at whether additional federal legislation may be necessary.”

Ms. Feinstein, a California Democrat who previously served as San Francisco mayor, urged the city to join the Department of Homeland Security’s Priority Enforcement Program, which “facilitates the removal of dangerous criminal aliens.”

The program, created as part of President Obama’s executive action on immigration in November, “enables DHS to work with state and local law enforcement to take custody of individuals who pose a danger to public safety before those individuals are released into our communities,” according to the ICE description.

“By agreeing to participate in the Priority Enforcement Program, San Francisco would provide notice to ICE before releasing aliens with long criminal records, such as Mr. Sanchez, upon request from ICE,” Ms. Feinstein said.

Lopez-Sanchez was charged Monday with murder in the death of Ms. Steinle, who was walking on San Francisco’s Pier 14 with her father when she was shot.

He told KGO-TV in a jailhouse interview that he shot her accidentally when a gun he found wrapped in a T-shirt went off, and that he cannot remember the details because he had taken sleeping pills.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 10, 2015, 10:29:01 PM
But alerting the INS would've been racist!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on July 10, 2015, 10:49:34 PM

But alerting the INS would've been racist!

Said no one but Republicans ever.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on July 10, 2015, 10:55:38 PM
lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on July 11, 2015, 12:46:42 AM
Feinstein is mummified


 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on July 11, 2015, 10:45:32 AM

Feinstein is mummified

California is terrible.  We elect the same damn people every term just to bitch about how shitty they are and watch them shift legislative responsibility to the voters via ballot initiatives.  Feinstein isn't one of the worst offenders.  Our state assemblymen are the worst.  At least I've got Ben Allen pioneering SB 277 (the vaccination bill).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 12, 2015, 10:37:57 PM
http://www.slate.com/articles/business/the_bills/2015/07/health_care_premiums_going_up_obamacare_has_been_solidified_but_it_s_failed.html?wpsrc=sh_all_mob_tw_top
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 04, 2015, 01:38:05 PM
Well, excrement.  They really are taking our jerbs.

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-immigration-officeholder-20150804-story.html#page=1
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 04, 2015, 02:43:27 PM

Well, excrement.  They really are taking our jerbs.

http://www.latimes.com/local/california/la-me-immigration-officeholder-20150804-story.html#page=1

Wait, how are illegals able to apply for and attend college here? Are there schools that don't require proof of resident status? That's absurd.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 04, 2015, 02:44:41 PM
And how is he not getting deported after being found that he's been living here illegally? The whole system is fucked.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 04, 2015, 03:06:30 PM
Wait, how are illegals able to apply for and attend college here? Are there schools that don't require proof of resident status? That's absurd.

I honestly don't remember what I had to provide when I went to college. I don't remember digging up my BC or anything.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 04, 2015, 06:57:42 PM
Wait, how are illegals able to apply for and attend college here? Are there schools that don't require proof of resident status? That's absurd.

I'm guessing they apply as immigrants using their citizenship from another country.  I'm not sure how they get away without having a VISA to stay here, though.  It's so stupid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 04, 2015, 06:58:09 PM
And how is he not getting deported after being found that he's been living here illegally? The whole system is fucked.

It'll be awesome if this gets him booted.  He lives in a pooper, so it would have a big uproar.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 04, 2015, 07:00:50 PM

It'll be awesome if this gets him booted.  He lives in a pooper, so it would have a big uproar.

I like how he said "I did nothing wrong." Maybe it wasn't his choice to come here, but it was wrong of his entire family to do so, and against the law. People in other countries wait decades for an opportunity to live and work in a county like ours, and you think that it's alright to just bypass the entire process and sneak right in? freak them. No sympathy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 04, 2015, 07:26:20 PM
https://professionals.collegeboard.com/guidance/financial-aid/undocumented-students

Quote
Undocumented students may incorrectly assume that they cannot legally attend college in the United States. However, there is no federal or state law that prohibits the admission of undocumented immigrants to U.S. colleges, public or private. Federal or state laws do not require students to prove citizenship in order to enter U.S. institutions of higher education. Yet institutional policies on admitting undocumented students vary.

Time to make one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 04, 2015, 07:28:30 PM
I like how he said "I did nothing wrong." Maybe it wasn't his choice to come here, but it was wrong of his entire family to do so, and against the law. People in other countries wait decades for an opportunity to live and work in a county like ours, and you think that it's alright to just bypass the entire process and sneak right in? freak them. No sympathy.

I have sympathy for a kid who is dragged here and raised here only to get deported to a country he doesn't know because his parents came here illegally.  All the sympathy in the world.  It's his parents' fault, though, and there's a difference between feeling sympathetic and believing it justifies amnesty.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 04, 2015, 07:39:05 PM
I have sympathy for a kid who is dragged here and raised here only to get deported to a country he doesn't know because his parents came here illegally.  All the sympathy in the world.  It's his parents' fault, though, and there's a difference between feeling sympathetic and believing it justifies amnesty.

I agree.  The tough situation is illegal immigrants who sneak in and excrement out a bunch of kids in America.  Can't really separate the kids from the parents but it's not fair to the kids to get punted back to a country they don't know either.  There isn't a perfect solution.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 04, 2015, 07:42:50 PM
I agree.  The tough situation is illegal immigrants who sneak in and excrement out a bunch of kids in America.  Can't really separate the kids from the parents but it's not fair to the kids to get punted back to a country they don't know either.  There isn't a perfect solution.

This American Life had a good episode about what happens to Mexicans who are brought here illegally as children, raised as Americans, then deported back to Mexico, a completely unfamiliar place to them. Many of them end up working at Mexican call centers for American companies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 04, 2015, 10:10:45 PM
I agree.  The tough situation is illegal immigrants who sneak in and excrement out a bunch of kids in America.  Can't really separate the kids from the parents but it's not fair to the kids to get punted back to a country they don't know either.  There isn't a perfect solution.

My wife used to have classrooms full of them.  She still has some, I'm guessing, but it used to be more anchor babies than not in her class.  The funny thing is that her school was one of the best public options around.  The illegal parents would try to get their kids into the charter school and leave them with people if they got deported.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 05, 2015, 09:43:04 PM
I agree.  The tough situation is illegal immigrants who sneak in and excrement out a bunch of kids in America.  Can't really separate the kids from the parents but it's not fair to the kids to get punted back to a country they don't know either.  There isn't a perfect solution.

Sure there is, let them stay. Fifty years ago if they were from Europe not a second thought would be wasted on this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 05, 2015, 09:45:51 PM

Sure there is, let them stay. Fifty years ago if they were from Europe not a second thought would be wasted on this.

What are you smoking? It's a lot tougher to come to this country from across an ocean. The U.S didn't have that problem back then, and most European immigrants were legal at the time, especially since we had labor shortages.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 05, 2015, 09:47:45 PM
What are you smoking? It's a lot tougher to come to this country from across an ocean. The U.S didn't have that problem back then, and most European immigrants were legal at the time, especially since we had labor shortages.

Bullshit, my entire family were immigrants at one time, you're full of excrement. It's simple people don't like where the new immigrants are coming from, wrap that up however you want it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 05, 2015, 09:56:44 PM
What are you smoking? It's a lot tougher to come to this country from across an ocean.

I dunno, handing over a few pounds / francs / deutschmarks / zlotys / shekels / sheep for a one way boat ticket seems pretty easy compared to swimming the Rio Grande, hanging off the axle of a 16 wheeler and dodging the armed lunatics manning the border.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 05, 2015, 11:07:13 PM

I dunno, handing over a few pounds / francs / deutschmarks / zlotys / shekels / sheep for a one way boat ticket seems pretty easy compared to swimming the Rio Grande, hanging off the axle of a 16 wheeler and dodging the armed lunatics manning the border.

They'd still have to be processed at Ellis Island.

Anyway, the point is that now we have tougher limits. Makes no difference where the immigrants are from. There have always been Mexicans crossing the border, but we haven't needed new immigrants in decades, and that's why there are tougher laws. Mexicans aren't the only ones getting deported. They're just the biggest problem that can potentially be controlled.

But you guys can keep thinking anti-illegal immigration is solely a race issue. Like everything else apparently.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 06, 2015, 06:03:12 AM


Bullshit, my entire family were immigrants at one time

Now my opinion has changed. All immigration should be banned.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 06, 2015, 07:03:26 AM

Now my opinion has changed. All immigration should be banned.

Haha I don't blame you.


Tommy, reading my post I didn't mean to sound so harsh. Sorry
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 06, 2015, 08:37:57 AM

Haha I don't blame you.


Tommy, reading my post I didn't mean to sound so harsh. Sorry

Haha I didn't take any offense. My parents were immigrants, too, but they kicked their asses getting here legally. I have relatives who did so illegally, and they've been deported. No sympathy. If you want to cut corners, better be prepared for the consequences. Some managed to stay because they convinced the court that they're refugees, etc, but there are plenty of European and other non Mexicans getting into trouble. In fact, even at the border, a quarter of illegals apprehended a year are non-Mexicans.

It's being labeled a race issue just because the majority of illegals are Mexican, and because the race card is probably the most useful tool in the Left's arsenal. It's plays into the golden rule of politics in this country: if one side supports something, the other side has to be against it by any means necessary. So when a republican talks about protecting the borders and stopping illegal immigration, a democrat will counter with "I for one am not racist and love the Mexican people." It's bullshit, and people buy into that. After years of the same charade, anti-illegal immigration has turned into anti-Brown people. And bleeding hearts are therefore incapable of recognizing it as a problem as a result.

Sort of like how any talk about reforming social programs is immediately shot down as "anti-black". Politics Fuckn suck.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 06, 2015, 08:58:21 AM
Tommy and Puck.  Poster children for immediate deportation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 06, 2015, 09:08:09 AM
Interesting that Tommy's decrying people for playing the racism card, and yet he's the only one talking about race.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 06, 2015, 09:55:46 AM
Sure there is, let them stay. Fifty years ago if they were from Europe not a second thought would be wasted on this.

Well, that's a silly thing to say.  50 years ago there was little illegal immigration from Europe.  The numbers aren't even close to what they are today.  We permitted high numbers of random immigration when we had a need for it thanks to the rapid explosion of industry.  Hell, 52 years ago we still had the Bracero program which brought Mexicans here in the easiest manner possible and allowed them to return home freely.  We closed things off when we didn't have the resources.  We talk about Mexicans now because insane numbers come here without that demonstrated need for them and they're easy to deport because they share a border.  It's a poor comparison because it was an entirely different time for reasons that have nothing to do with race.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 06, 2015, 09:57:02 AM
Oh, and Ellis Island, which served immigration from Europe, closed in 1964 for precisely the reason that we were trying to stop immigration everywhere, not just from Mexico.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jetaho on August 06, 2015, 10:08:58 AM
Anybody watching the Republican debate tonight?  I know I'm not.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 06, 2015, 10:11:31 AM

Interesting that Tommy's decrying people for playing the racism card, and yet he's the only one talking about race.

Did you miss the post where Puck said that it's only an issue because of the type of people who are mainly coming here?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 06, 2015, 10:37:03 AM
Anybody watching the Republican debate tonight?  I know I'm not.

I'm not watching only because my TV has been out since Monday. freaking DirecTV.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 06, 2015, 10:42:58 AM
Did you miss the post where Puck said that it's only an issue because of the type of people who are mainly coming here?

It's a very common argument, the same as people who say "We're all descended from immigrants!"  That's true, but that doesn't mean the situations are comparable.  They can decry the fact that America has grown too densely populated to support further lower class immigration.  It's silly to blame people's attitudes for that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 06, 2015, 10:49:24 AM

It's a very common argument, the same as people who say "We're all descended from immigrants!"  That's true, but that doesn't mean the situations are comparable.  They can decry the fact that America has grown too densely populated to support further lower class immigration.  It's silly to blame people's attitudes for that.

What blows my mind is that you have people who have no problem with illegal immigration, and at the same time complain about low wages. Both are closely related. If you dilute the unskilled labor market with illegal immigrants, then that puts a hell of a lot of downward pressure on wages.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 06, 2015, 11:01:42 AM
What blows my mind is that you have people who have no problem with illegal immigration, and at the same time complain about low wages. Both are closely related. If you dilute the unskilled labor market with illegal immigrants, then that puts a hell of a lot of downward pressure on wages.

Hang on though, I thought you free market lovers were all about allowing economic forces to dictate behaviour, not legislation? Isn't it largely proven that economic immigration, both legal and illegal, is a net benefit to the US economy?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 06, 2015, 11:12:48 AM

Hang on though, I thought you free market lovers were all about allowing economic forces to dictate behaviour, not legislation? Isn't it largely proven that economic immigration, both legal and illegal, is a net benefit to the US economy?

Funny you should say that, because adding more legislation (increasing minimum wage for instance) will increase demand for undocumented and unskilled labor. If you keep freaking with the system, you're going to end up with a lot of unwanted consequences.

You only think it's a net benefit because the supply of immigrants fills the demand for labor, which is there primarily as a result of American workers simply costing too much.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 06, 2015, 11:18:14 AM
Funny you should say that, because adding more legislation (increasing minimum wage for instance) will increase demand for undocumented and unskilled labor. If you keep freaking with the system, you're going to end up with a lot of unwanted consequences.

You only think it's a net benefit because the supply of immigrants fills the demand for labor, which is there primarily as a result of American workers simply costing too much.

OK, so what you're saying is that the issue of illegal immigration is actually caused by American employers breaking the law because it's inconvenient to their profit margins. But rather than address that, you'd prefer instead to demonise people responding in an entirely economically rational way and then pin the blame for those circumstances on those Americans who are too bloody rude to just accept the poverty wages that employers want to pay.

Essentially, your argument boils down to "it's everybody's fault except the wealthy", when the reality is that if the American business community bought into their part of the core social contract, which is that everyone's in this thing together, there wouldn't be this issue in the first place.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 06, 2015, 11:31:33 AM

OK, so what you're saying is that the issue of illegal immigration is actually caused by American employers breaking the law because it's inconvenient to their profit margins. But rather than address that, you'd prefer instead to demonise people responding in an entirely economically rational way and then pin the blame for those circumstances on those Americans who are too bloody rude to just accept the poverty wages that employers want to pay.

Essentially, your argument boils down to "it's everybody's fault except the wealthy", when the reality is that if the American business community bought into their part of the core social contract, which is that everyone's in this thing together, there wouldn't be this issue in the first place.

Demonizing? They're breaking the law. Both the people who hire and the illegal immigrants themselves. It's not easy. Sure you can require that all contractors employ citizens or resident aliens, or you can police the border where the influx of immigrants are coming from. If I'm a struggling landscaping company, and there's an excess of illegals waiting around begging for low income work, it's hard to "do the right thing" and hire much more expensive unskilled labor. They're already here, and more and more are coming every day. You can legislate the hell out of the demand, but the demand will remain as long as the supply is plentiful and cheap. You make matters even worse by increasing minimum wage and requiring health benefits etc.

Japan is a good example of how immigration should be handled. Granted they benefit from being an island nation and where non-Japanese stick out like sore thumbs, but the country has enjoyed low income inequality and full employment for decades, all that despite a minimum wage of $5.50 to $7/hr. How? Because they don't have streams of low cost labor running around. They actually have the reverse problem: they need workers, and are running out of unskilled labor. How do they solve it? They have work programs on contract. Take hundreds of unskilled laborers from SE Asia, and assign them to a company for a year or so. When they're done, they go back. They get criticized for not just opening up their borders and letting anyone in, even getting called racist, but they're going about it in the absolute right way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 06, 2015, 11:36:04 AM
^We used to have that with Hispanic workers in the Bracero program.  It was great.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 06, 2015, 11:38:37 AM
Demonizing? They're breaking the law. Both the people who hire and the illegal immigrants themselves. It's not easy. Sure you can require that all contractors employ citizens or resident aliens, or you can police the border where the influx of immigrants are coming from. If I'm a struggling landscaping company, and there's an excess of illegals waiting around begging for low income work, it's hard to "do the right thing" and hire much more expensive unskilled labor. They're already here, and more and more are coming every day. You can legislate the hell out of the demand, but the demand will remain as long as the supply is plentiful and cheap. You make matters even worse by increasing minimum wage and requiring health benefits etc.

I didn't say anything about legislation, I said that American employers are breaking the social contract (as well as probably a whole bunch of existing laws). Illegal immigration goes away when illegal employment goes away. Blaming immigrants for taking illegal jobs is like blaming money for bank robberies.

Quote
Japan is a good example of how immigration should be handled. Granted they benefit from being an island nation and where non-Japanese stick out like sore thumbs, but the country has enjoyed low income inequality and full employment for decades, all that despite a minimum wage of $5.50 to $7/hr. How? Because they don't have streams of low cost labor running around. They actually have the reverse problem: they need workers, and are running out of unskilled labor. How do they solve it? They have work programs on contract. Take hundreds of unskilled laborers from SE Asia, and assign them to a company for a year or so. When they're done, they go back. They get criticized for not just opening up their borders and letting anyone in, even getting called racist, but they're going about it in the absolute right way.

So what you're saying is that apart from the fact that Japan is absolutely nothing like America in a number of fundamental ways, America should try and be like Japan? Apart from the fact that I'm male and short and not very pretty, I should totally try and do what Kim Kardashian has done because then I'd be rich and famous and everything would be peachy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 06, 2015, 11:42:55 AM
What blows my mind is that you have people who have no problem with illegal immigration, and at the same time complain about low wages. Both are closely related. If you dilute the unskilled labor market with illegal immigrants, then that puts a hell of a lot of downward pressure on wages.

I want immigrants coming to this country. Sure it's with stipulations and such but the people that want to come here, work and prosper make this country a better place, probably better than what I have made it. My stipulations aren't that tough either, they're what my ancestors did. I think if you come to this country you should learn English and if you want to stay you should try and become a naturalized citizen. It's my main problem with the banana republic I live in down here, there are a lot of people of Hispanic descent that refuse to learn English or frankly really do not have to. If that makes me a racist so be it.

Did you miss the post where Puck said that it's only an issue because of the type of people who are mainly coming here?

Yeah I firmly believe there are a lot of people that don't like Mexicans coming here. You can not look at me a with a straight face and say a lot of people don't think that way.

Well, that's a silly thing to say.  50 years ago there was little illegal immigration from Europe.  The numbers aren't even close to what they are today.  We permitted high numbers of random immigration when we had a need for it thanks to the rapid explosion of industry.  Hell, 52 years ago we still had the Bracero program which brought Mexicans here in the easiest manner possible and allowed them to return home freely.  We closed things off when we didn't have the resources.  We talk about Mexicans now because insane numbers come here without that demonstrated need for them and they're easy to deport because they share a border.  It's a poor comparison because it was an entirely different time for reasons that have nothing to do with race.

Well I had a tough night I already apologized to Tommy. However, the 50 years ago thing was mainly that people don't like the mix of immigrants today. I don't like the fact that American's act so entitled about having the best country in the world and don't let people come here that are dying to better themselves because frankly it is the best country in the world in many respects.

I know plenty of Indians for instance that go to tech schools in India and want to come here and have to work odd jobs and get lucky to get a visa/green card. I know of Dr.'s, lawyers accountants from other places that are threatened with deportation etc. from all over the world. I think that's freaking insane. I know the security issues with respect to allowing immigrants from certain area's.

Think of this, there's a sizable Iranian immigrant population in this country and as a group they're pretty successful. You can point to many of them being Christian/Jewish and not Muslim and you would be correct. I have Pakistani freinds, one was a Dr. at 18, freaking Doogie Quarashi Houser.

Largely, I am saying not letting people that want to come here and prosper is cutting our nose to spite our face.


That probably has nothing to do with illegal immigration.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 06, 2015, 11:49:10 AM
Funny how JE has no problem comparing America's health care system with other countries, but you bring up a comparison to support an argument against his, and suddenly it's ridiculous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 06, 2015, 11:58:41 AM
Funny how JE has no problem comparing America's health care system with other countries, but you bring up a comparison to support an argument against his, and suddenly it's ridiculous.

I think I've been at pains on numerous occasions to state that it's obvious that America couldn't very easily follow any kind of state-owned healthcare model because that ship has long since sailed onto the seas of private ownership, just as I have also fully acknowledged that the issue of gun control isn't as easy to fix as it was elsewhere by virtue of the number of guns in existence in the country. My point on both of those issues is that an inability to achieve optimum outcome overnight shouldn't mean throwing ones' hands in the air and saying "freak it".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 06, 2015, 01:23:49 PM
Apart from the fact that I'm male and short and not very pretty, I should totally try and do what Kim Kardashian has done because then I'd be rich and famous and everything would be peachy.

I just sent you Ray J's number, check your PMs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 30, 2015, 11:20:34 PM
Ohio is pissed. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-denali-alaska_55e36f8ce4b0aec9f35398f3)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 30, 2015, 11:41:03 PM

Ohio is pissed. (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/obama-denali-alaska_55e36f8ce4b0aec9f35398f3)

I don't really understand why he's pushing for the change.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 31, 2015, 01:59:09 AM

I don't really understand why he's pushing for the change.

It should have been changed 40 years ago.  The only reason it wasn't changed is that Ohio pitched a fit.  It got the name because some random guy decided to start calling it Mt Mckinley after a presidential candidate and it stuck.  It took 20 years before the US recognized the name, and even then likely only because McKinley was an assassination victim.  He wasn't a memorable president other than that, and he has absolutely nothing to do with Alaska.  The actual people of the state never liked it, so they've been trying to get it fixed ever since.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on August 31, 2015, 06:56:32 AM
I think I've been at pains on numerous occasions to state that it's obvious that America couldn't very easily follow any kind of state-owned healthcare model because that ship has long since sailed onto the seas of private ownership, just as I have also fully acknowledged that the issue of gun control isn't as easy to fix as it was elsewhere by virtue of the number of guns in existence in the country. My point on both of those issues is that an inability to achieve optimum outcome overnight shouldn't mean throwing ones' hands in the air and saying "freak it".

Yes, 100% this. The conservative playbook for at least the last 8 years is basically acknowledging a problem might exist but it's really really hard to fix so just leave it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 02, 2015, 01:22:08 PM
I want to take some popcorn down to Kentucky and watch the shitstorm at the Rowan County Clerk's office.  This is getting good.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 02, 2015, 01:43:43 PM
I want to take some popcorn down to Kentucky and watch the shitstorm at the Rowan County Clerk's office.  This is getting good.

It is hilarious.  I feel bad for that gay couple, but I can't help laughing at the brainwashed clerk.  Funny that she has been married 4 times to 3 different men and is refusing to marry someone else.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 02, 2015, 05:29:15 PM
I'm not convinced she isn't an elaborate Rachel Dratch character.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 02, 2015, 07:02:49 PM
It is hilarious.  I feel bad for that gay couple, but I can't help laughing at the brainwashed clerk.  Funny that she has been married 4 times to 3 different men and is refusing to marry someone else.

Don't feel too bad for the gay couple.  The Supreme Court ruling is in full effect, and it takes time for things to adjust.  As pissed as they are, they feel like they're making a difference.  This is much more enjoyable because of the shitshow it's going to inspire on both sides of the political debate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 02, 2015, 09:52:22 PM
https://twitter.com/nexttokimdavis
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 03, 2015, 02:29:58 PM
https://twitter.com/nexttokimdavis

Hilarious.

(http://logoonline.mtvnimages.com/uri/mgid:uma:image:logotv.com:10787708?quality=0.8&format=jpg&height=495&width=660)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on September 03, 2015, 03:33:11 PM
Bitch got arrested.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/03/politics/kentucky-clerk-same-sex-marriage-kim-davis/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 03, 2015, 04:09:27 PM
Oh excrement.  That's a terrible decision by the judge, although he's in a tough position.  This is going to get so much worse now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 03, 2015, 04:41:05 PM
Do all people in Kentucky look like this, or just the religious nutters?

(http://cdn.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/03093846/AntiGayDavisSupporters-1024x673.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 03, 2015, 05:42:50 PM

Do all people in Kentucky look like this, or just the religious nutters?

Yes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 04, 2015, 08:02:27 AM
She claims she's going to stay in jail "as long as it takes." Probably not the best move.

I know being an atheist/agnostic is the new normal, but it pisses me off when anti-religion people go on and on about how stupid people of faith are. Then I see idiots like this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 04, 2015, 09:19:44 AM
She claims she's going to stay in jail "as long as it takes." Probably not the best move.

I know being an atheist/agnostic is the new normal, but it pisses me off when anti-religion people go on and on about how stupid people of faith are. Then I see idiots like this.

I have zero problem with her doing this if she's willing to recognize that she has to accept the punishment for refusing to do her job.  I disagree with her stance 100%, but I see way too many of these people who preach and preach and have no real backbone behind it.  If you're going to take this hardline stance that God is commanding you to do something, then freaking do it and suffer the punishment.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on September 04, 2015, 09:21:35 AM
Is her last name Gambini?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 04, 2015, 09:26:43 AM
I have zero problem with her doing this if she's willing to recognize that she has to accept the punishment for refusing to do her job.  I disagree with her stance 100%, but I see way too many of these people who preach and preach and have no real backbone behind it.  If you're going to take this hardline stance that God is commanding you to do something, then freaking do it and suffer the punishment.

That's a fair point. It's still stupid because the end result is she just never leaves jail (though it's more likely she just loses her job and this all ends).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 04, 2015, 09:29:17 AM
She can't lose her job unless she's impeached, apparently she's elected rather than employed. I don't know when the next election is due to happen but I suspect that there will be a huge amount of effort to have her re-elected.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 04, 2015, 09:31:28 AM
That's a fair point. It's still stupid because the end result is she just never leaves jail (though it's more likely she just loses her job and this all ends).

If she gets relieved of duty and released from prison without ever wavering her stance, she's going to be an instant millionaire.  She'll get invited to speak at every Christian conference there is and donations will pour in.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 04, 2015, 09:45:37 AM
I recall seeing she was elected before, but completely forgot when I posted that earlier. So she's going to be a martyr for the anti-gay movement. Spectacular.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on September 04, 2015, 09:50:21 AM
If they're going to use that disgusting hag as a model for anti gay marriage stuff, that's fantastic, it's only hurting their cause. The more stupid crap the religious right does the better. It alerts people that don't ordinarily care to what intolerant assholes are up to.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 04, 2015, 10:07:36 AM
If they're going to use that disgusting hag as a model for anti gay marriage stuff, that's fantastic, it's only hurting their cause. The more stupid crap the religious right does the better. It alerts people that don't ordinarily care to what intolerant assholes are up to.

My only problem with it is that shitheads like this give the vast majority of people of faith a bad name--who aren't anything like this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 04, 2015, 10:16:01 AM
My only problem with it is that shitheads like this give the vast majority of people of faith a bad name--who aren't anything like this.

I believe the stock response to that is something along the lines of "if the [faith] community won't speak out and do something about their problems, then they must all take the blame and responsibility for them".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 04, 2015, 10:23:24 AM
I believe the stock response to that is something along the lines of "if the [faith] community won't speak out and do something about their problems, then they must all take the blame and responsibility for them".

And that's fair too--based on where it comes from.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 04, 2015, 10:27:20 AM
I suppose it's irrelevent but before people go blaming the religious right, this freaking psycho is a registered Democrat.
But I agree with Alio, and to take it a step further it absolutely baffles me how the mainstream right can continue to prop up idiots like Davis and Cliven Bundy as some sort of heroes. So freaking dumb.

JE you realize you just pretty much made the textbook case FOR islamaphobia.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 04, 2015, 10:38:41 AM
I suppose it's irrelevent but before people go blaming the religious right, this freaking psycho is a registered Democrat.
But I agree with Alio, and to take it a step further it absolutely baffles me how the mainstream right can continue to prop up idiots like Davis and Cliven Bundy as some sort of heroes. So freaking dumb.

JE you realize you just pretty much made the textbook case FOR islamaphobia.



Not sure how much attention you pay to the discussions on here, but I was aping the ridiculous argument usually made by Islamophobes and against which I always argue vociferously.

You may not be aware, but my Dad is an Anglican priest. I'm not religious, but I don't hold my Dad responsible for the fuckwitted things done by Christian zealots any more than I hold Mr Rafiq who lives two doors down and waters my plants when I'm away responsible for beheading journalists and blowing up public transit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 04, 2015, 10:44:03 AM
Not sure how much attention you pay to the discussions on here, but I was aping the ridiculous argument usually made by Islamophobes and against which I always argue vociferously.

You may not be aware, but my Dad is an Anglican priest. I'm not religious, but I don't hold my Dad responsible for the fuckwitted things done by Christian zealots any more than I hold Mr Rafiq who lives two doors down and waters my plants when I'm away responsible for beheading journalists and blowing up public transit.

The only thing I hold grudges against with Middle Easterners is body odor. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 04, 2015, 11:28:27 AM
I actually expected more excrement like this to happen since the ruling. Since its been pretty much one crazed bitch, I'd say that's a good thing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 04, 2015, 01:00:43 PM
Not sure how much attention you pay to the discussions on here, but I was aping the ridiculous argument usually made by Islamophobes and against which I always argue vociferously.

You may not be aware, but my Dad is an Anglican priest. I'm not religious, but I don't hold my Dad responsible for the fuckwitted things done by Christian zealots any more than I hold Mr Rafiq who lives two doors down and waters my plants when I'm away responsible for beheading journalists and blowing up public transit.

In the interest of full disclosure, I once was one of those who said Muslims in the Middle East had a responsibility to law enforcement and to the world to out those within their home towns who were operating terror cells.

That said, today the problem is far too large for that, and those same people are now fleeing for their lives so the argument is now ridiculous. I still don't think I was wrong back then that average people should have stepped in. It may have helped prevent what we have today. I'll freely admit that may be too naive though. Obviously I don't live there and can't say what was or was not reasonable action.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 04, 2015, 02:30:42 PM
I wasn't aiming it at anyone in particular.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 04, 2015, 03:01:24 PM
I wasn't aiming it at anyone in particular.

Yeah, I didn't think that was a directed comment. Like I said, in the interest of full disclosure. Also, today I'd wholly agree with you that it's ridiculous to expect any Muslim anywhere to do anything.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 04, 2015, 04:15:49 PM
I agree with JE, holy war is the only solution.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on September 10, 2015, 02:24:58 PM
If I just woke up from a 1 year coma, I would assume this was from Onion.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/09/10/politics/donald-trump-carly-fiorina-looks-rolling-stone/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 10, 2015, 02:59:19 PM
If nothing else, I applaud Trump for his war on the media. People are getting tired of pundits spinning excrement all the time. The more he doesn't apologize for things people imply he meant, the better his numbers get.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 10, 2015, 03:07:28 PM
If nothing else, I applaud Trump for his war on the media. People are getting tired of pundits spinning excrement all the time. The more he doesn't apologize for things people imply he meant, the better his numbers get.

Trumps just Obama for the right. Hes not trying to get elected by having good ideas, hes trying to get elected by being a celebrity.

Maybe soon well see pictures of Trump shirtless at the beach
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on September 10, 2015, 03:17:48 PM
^These guys.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on September 10, 2015, 03:23:09 PM
If nothing else, I applaud Trump for his war on the media. People are getting tired of pundits spinning excrement all the time. The more he doesn't apologize for things people imply he meant, the better his numbers get.

So you're cool with him going after that bastion of truth Fox News?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 10, 2015, 04:15:51 PM

So you're cool with him going after that bastion of truth Fox News?

Of course. I hate all media outlets.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on September 10, 2015, 04:47:07 PM
Of course. I hate all media outlets.

Word up as William Tecumseh Sherman jokingly said:

Quote
If I had my choice I would kill every reporter in the world, but I am sure we would be getting reports from Hell before breakfast.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on September 10, 2015, 06:32:13 PM
Trumps just Obama for the right. Hes not trying to get elected by having good ideas, hes trying to get elected by being a celebrity.

Maybe soon well see pictures of Trump shirtless at the beach

Nah Kanye = Obama, Trump = Reagan. Get your celebrities getting elected as president pairings right.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on September 10, 2015, 08:25:48 PM
Trumps just Obama for the right. Hes not trying to get elected by having good ideas, hes trying to get elected by being a celebrity.

Maybe soon well see pictures of Trump shirtless at the beach

If Obama is in the race for 2016 he better declare, or maybe he's waiting to see if Biden runs?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 11, 2015, 12:49:34 PM
This could get interesting.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/anti-government-group-vows-to-keep-kim-davis-out-of-jail_55f1d06be4b03784e2786c51

Armed citizens attempting to prevent law enforcement officials from enacting the orders of the court? This is what it's coming to now?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 11, 2015, 01:46:15 PM
This could get interesting.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/anti-government-group-vows-to-keep-kim-davis-out-of-jail_55f1d06be4b03784e2786c51

Armed citizens attempting to prevent law enforcement officials from enacting the orders of the court? This is what it's coming to now?
Ha.  Because that's what I'd want on my tombstone when a cop kills me.

"Died defending religious nut."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on September 11, 2015, 01:49:11 PM
Ha.  Because that's what I'd want on my tombstone when a cop kills me.

"Died defending deez nutz."


FYP
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 11, 2015, 04:27:06 PM
FYP

Did you see the Key and Peele finale?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on September 11, 2015, 05:09:05 PM
Did you see the Key and Peele finale?

To this day I forget to DVR that show.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 16, 2015, 10:06:04 AM
Not sure where to put this, but this is fucked up:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/16/440820557/high-school-student-shows-off-homemade-clock-gets-handcuffed?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20150916
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 16, 2015, 10:10:25 AM
Not sure where to put this, but this is fucked up:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/16/440820557/high-school-student-shows-off-homemade-clock-gets-handcuffed?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20150916

That is fucked up, but to be fair when it comes to schools and bombs, etc, people don't freak around.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2015, 10:11:25 AM
What's the most effective method of shaming the school administration?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on September 16, 2015, 10:12:34 AM
Not sure where to put this, but this is fucked up:

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/16/440820557/high-school-student-shows-off-homemade-clock-gets-handcuffed?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20150916

"It's a clock"

"Not good enough of an explanation"

Wat
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 16, 2015, 10:40:49 AM
That is fucked up, but to be fair when it comes to schools and bombs, etc, people don't freak around.

Yes, which is why they called the cops and said "Hey, we need you to check this out."  When they discovered it was NOT a bomb, the kid should have been released.  The whole "Why did you build a clock?" aspect for a kid interested in engineering, and the subsequent arrest and suspension, is incredibly fucked up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 16, 2015, 10:41:27 AM
What's the most effective method of shaming the school administration?

Hahaha.  It's Texas.  Nothing will be done.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 16, 2015, 10:41:43 AM

Yes, which is why they called the cops and said "Hey, we need you to check this out."  When they discovered it was NOT a bomb, the kid should have been released.  The whole "Why did you build a clock?" aspect for a kid interested in engineering, and the subsequent arrest and suspension, is incredibly fucked up.

It's actually hilariously fucked up. Doesn't even seem real.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on September 16, 2015, 10:51:18 AM
Clock/Watch building can be a pretty lucrative career.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 16, 2015, 10:53:26 AM
BTW it's funny how they thought an actual terrorist would build a clock bomb like you'd see in corny action flicks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 16, 2015, 10:56:12 AM
The school is perfectly in its right to overreact and freak out about a potential safety issue.  It's kind of the job of the police to ground things again.  Aside from the suspension, it's hard to criticize the school's initial reaction TOO much.  It's likely true that more leeway would have been given to a white kid, but I have no idea how that discussion went.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 16, 2015, 10:58:43 AM
The school is perfectly in its right to overreact and freak out about a potential safety issue.  It's kind of the job of the police to ground things again.  Aside from the suspension, it's hard to criticize the school's initial reaction TOO much.  It's likely true that more leeway would have been given to a white kid, but I have no idea how that discussion went.

Impossible to say, but you know the "racist America is at it again" crowd will light excrement up again. Only saving grace is that the cops here were black, and black cops can't be racist, so...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2015, 12:06:26 PM

Hahaha.  It's Texas.  Nothing will be done.

I mean vigilante shaming, like the lion hunting dentist got.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 16, 2015, 01:06:11 PM
He has already received invitations to visit the White House:

(http://cdn.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/16172502/Facebook-preview-2-1024x532.jpg)

and Facebook:

Quote
Mark Zuckerberg
30 mins · Palo Alto, CA, United States ·
 
You’ve probably seen the story about Ahmed, the 14 year old student in Texas who built a clock and was arrested when he took it to school.
Having the skill and ambition to build something cool should lead to applause, not arrest. The future belongs to people like Ahmed.
Ahmed, if you ever want to come by Facebook, I'd love to meet you. Keep building.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 16, 2015, 01:37:49 PM
^Ok, I'm done feeling sorry for him.  On to the next outrage.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on September 16, 2015, 02:14:20 PM
Time to make some clocks to meet Leaders of the World and billionaires, then walk into a school.

Be right back.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on September 16, 2015, 02:15:09 PM
That was quick! I'm gonna meet Obama and Elon Musk next Monday!

Hope my black eye disappears before then.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2015, 04:57:41 PM

^Ok, I'm done feeling sorry for him.  On to the next outrage.

This isn't about making him feel better, I want to see the people who fucked up feel bad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on September 16, 2015, 07:33:51 PM
Does the Republican debate belong in this thread or in a thread about Comedy Central.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 16, 2015, 07:53:21 PM
TIL that debate viewing parties actually Fuckn exist. How sad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2015, 07:53:31 PM

Does the Republican debate belong in this thread or in a thread about Comedy Central.

Neither.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 16, 2015, 08:09:46 PM
He has already received invitations to visit the White House:

(http://cdn.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/09/16172502/Facebook-preview-2-1024x532.jpg)

and Facebook:


Because the secret services is going to be cool with someone named Ahmed Mohamed bringing this into the White House  to show the gosh darned president

(http://media.npr.org/assets/img/2015/09/16/clock-irving-texas_wide-83cea5d55d51f621c97885c857e8f877d92f850f-s1500-c85.jpg)

Is it messed up? A little. Is racial profiling involved ? Almost certainly (to an extent)

But what do you think would've happened if he tried getting on a freaking airplane with something like that ?  Hed be in freaking Guantanamo or some excrement

Cant blame the school for doing what they did.

Nobody knows what a bomb looks like in real life. But thats exactly what a bomb looks like in the movies. And everybody knows what a clock looks like, and that looks absolutely nothing like one

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2015, 08:10:37 PM
The teacher overreacted like a dickhead but TSA would have been ten times worse.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on September 16, 2015, 08:12:25 PM
Shut the freak up, dcm. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 16, 2015, 08:13:23 PM
Shut the freak up, dcm. 

Am I wrong ?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on September 16, 2015, 08:17:32 PM
Am I wrong ?

always
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 16, 2015, 08:17:58 PM
That actually looks a lot worse than I thought.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2015, 08:19:51 PM

That actually looks a lot worse than I thought.

Well yeah, if they completely leave out the part of the clock that looks like a clock from the picture. I can go dismantle my bedside clock just enough to make an idiot panic when he sees it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 16, 2015, 09:17:34 PM
That picture pretty much cements my reaction.  I can't fault the school too much for its reaction, but the cops fucked up and he really shouldn't have been suspended in the end.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 17, 2015, 10:32:41 AM
TIL that debate viewing parties actually Fuckn exist. How sad.

I've never done it, but it would probably be a fun party if you had a drinking game where every time Trump said the word "Mexico" you took a shot.

Though you'd likely have alcohol poisoning 20 minutes in.

That picture pretty much cements my reaction.  I can't fault the school too much for its reaction, but the cops fucked up and he really shouldn't have been suspended in the end.

That's kind of where I've been sitting since yesterday's online outrage. I can't fault anyone for being cautious (no matter the kid's skin color) but once it was established that it was a clock, it should have ended any further nonsense.

Heaven forbid you say that on Twitter though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 17, 2015, 10:37:21 AM
^The safest course of action is to never say anything on Twitter.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 17, 2015, 11:13:31 AM
^The safest course of action is to never say anything on Twitter.

That's been my M.O. for the past few months. I still spend a lot of time scrolling through my timeline, but I rarely say anything anymore and when I do it's either sports-related or non-controversial. The constant raising of pitchforks is tiring.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 17, 2015, 11:54:50 AM
Social media should only be used to brag about good food you're eating or cool places you're traveling to.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 17, 2015, 01:49:48 PM
Social media should only be used to brag about good food you're eating or cool places you're traveling to.

I hate seeing foodie tweets. Almost as much as seeing tweets about someone's fantasy team. Pics of nice places is cool though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on September 17, 2015, 02:38:47 PM
Social media should only be used to brag about good food you're eating or cool places you're traveling to.
pictures of the food?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 17, 2015, 06:02:31 PM
This is what happened when Tommy googled this story.

(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/15/09/17/5650dea94648dfa2b6fc4d9ef5ef809f.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 17, 2015, 06:41:31 PM
Future QB of the Seahawks weighs in on clockgate

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/video-black-middle-schooler-slams-obamas-selective-outrage/

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 17, 2015, 10:37:18 PM
That kid is awesome.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 17, 2015, 11:31:13 PM
Future QB of the Seahawks weighs in on clockgate

http://www.theamericanmirror.com/video-black-middle-schooler-slams-obamas-selective-outrage/



Clicked link.

Saw the header: Kyle Olson.

Closed link.

Not even remotely interested in what the darling of The Free Republic has to offer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 18, 2015, 05:02:35 AM
Clicked link.

Saw the header: Kyle Olson.

Closed link.

Not even remotely interested in what the darling of The Free Republic has to offer.
No idea who that is

It was about the video not NJ the article
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 20, 2015, 10:56:43 AM
Best article I've seen about Ahmed Mohamed.  All the initial reports were that he took a clock apart and put it back together.  Suddenly, though, as the story spread he built the clock and was the future of engineering.  Some perspective and insight is a good thing.  I still can't figure out why he's going to the White House (although I can.  I just hate the stupid reasoning of social media demanding rapidity of thought and action).

http://blogs.artvoice.com/techvoice/2015/09/17/reverse-engineering-ahmed-mohameds-clock-and-ourselves/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 25, 2015, 09:14:08 AM
John Boehner is going to resign at the end of the month.  Wow.  We're just a few years removed from a series of elections in which the ability to garner bipartisan support was deemed a virtue to compete over.  Now, it's a weakness.  Trying to actually work together in Congress is a weakness.  freak.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/25/443406854/speaker-john-boehner-will-step-down-at-the-end-of-october?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20150925
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on September 25, 2015, 11:00:27 AM
John Boehner is going to resign at the end of the month.  Wow.  We're just a few years removed from a series of elections in which the ability to garner bipartisan support was deemed a virtue to compete over.  Now, it's a weakness.  Trying to actually work together in Congress is a weakness.  freak.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2015/09/25/443406854/speaker-john-boehner-will-step-down-at-the-end-of-october?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20150925

The next leader better not be one of the Tea Party demagogues. I'd like my country to actually function.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 25, 2015, 11:11:10 AM
The next leader better not be one of the Tea Party demagogues. I'd like my country to actually function.

LOL.

Too bad the last shutdown actually wasn't their fault, but hey keep thinking one senator from Texas has the ability to bring the entire government to a stand still.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 25, 2015, 11:19:43 AM
I'm gonna be freaking pissed if we have a shutdown over Planned Parenthood.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 25, 2015, 11:50:56 AM

I'm gonna be freaking pissed if we have a shutdown over Planned Parenthood.

Lame.  Planned Parenthood needs to be split.  How hard is it to fund an organization that provides all of the wonderful non-abortion services Planned Parenthood provides?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 25, 2015, 11:52:48 AM
I haven't heard one person defend Planned Parenthood by talking about their awesome abortion.  It's all about these necessary medical services for women.  Pretty sure the other side of the aisle has no problem funding an organization that provides only those.

Here's your compromise: you agree to fund contraception and you agree to not funnel funds to an organization that also provides abortions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 25, 2015, 11:56:36 AM
It's awesome that the next Speaker may be a rep from one of the shittiest districts in California, and one that probably has the highest per capita rate of illegal immigrants in the state.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on September 25, 2015, 03:51:18 PM
It's awesome that the next Speaker may be a rep from one of the shittiest districts in California, and one that probably has the highest per capita rate of illegal immigrants in the state.

I'm going to guess he's someone who is able to speak to a fellow congressman who are on the other team and make compromises and laws happen?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 30, 2015, 03:13:01 PM
I can't wait to see all of the people on the left who were sucking the Pope's dick last week react to the Kim Davis meeting.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 30, 2015, 04:27:36 PM
I can't wait to see all of the people on the left who were sucking the Pope's dick last week react to the Kim Davis meeting.
Does anyone think it actually happened?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 30, 2015, 09:11:12 PM
Does anyone think it actually happened?

Well, the Vatican confirmed it, so I think people do believe it happened.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 30, 2015, 09:11:41 PM
Something tells me Kevin McCarthy isn't going to be the next Speaker any more.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 30, 2015, 10:43:32 PM
Well, the Vatican confirmed it, so I think people do believe it happened.

Did they?

http://thinkprogress.org/lgbt/2015/09/30/3707228/kim-davis-pope-francis-secret-meeting/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 30, 2015, 11:46:59 PM
When everyone else is reporting that the Vatican confirmed the meeting, you're going to rely on Think Progress to be the lone reporter of the truth?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 30, 2015, 11:56:08 PM
When everyone else is reporting that the Vatican confirmed the meeting, you're going to rely on Think Progress to be the lone reporter of the truth?

No, that was the only story I'd seen on it. Still, looking at other media outlets the truth appears to be that the Vatican has refused to deny that the meeting happened, not that they confirmed it. It's not the same thing, although I won't argue that it may in the end amount to the same thing.

And if it does turn out that the Pope met with her, do you think that it's going to somehow shatter my hitherto unshakeable belief in the purity of the Catholic Church's vision? The current Pope is doing and saying a whole bunch of things that are good for society as a whole and by extension the organisation that he represents, especially relative to his predecessors, but let's not pretend that he isn't also in favour of a whole load of anachronistic bullshit that's designed to keep women barefoot and pregnant and the Catholic Church rolling in the cash. This isn't a binary situation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 30, 2015, 11:59:01 PM
I'm pretty sure I never argued any of that.  I said that it would be hilarious to see how the liberals who have latched onto the Pope just in the last few weeks respond to the meeting.  I certainly never said that those same people suddenly didn't have any problems with the Catholic Church.  I have no idea where that post came from to be honest.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on October 01, 2015, 10:24:47 AM
Something tells me Kevin McCarthy isn't going to be the next Speaker any more.

Yeah, that was pretty horrendous.  "Spent $4 million of taxpayer money on an unsuccessful witch hunt." does not look so good on a resume.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 08, 2015, 11:49:15 AM
Kevin McCarthy has pulled out of the race to be Speaker.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on October 08, 2015, 11:56:04 AM

Kevin McCarthy has pulled out of the race to be Speaker.

Smart of him to wait to do it.  A faster reaction would have sparked a lot more talk.  People seem to have already forgotten his comments.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 08, 2015, 12:03:05 PM
Smart of him to wait to do it.  A faster reaction would have sparked a lot more talk.  People seem to have already forgotten his comments.

Looks like some far right faction of the House refused to back him so he wasn't going to be able to get enough votes, hence why he withdrew.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on October 08, 2015, 12:24:02 PM
If I didn't live in this country, I'd have the popcorn ready to see who the crazies want as the Speaker of the House. Very exciting.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on October 08, 2015, 12:35:07 PM
If I didn't live in this country, I'd have the popcorn ready to see who the crazies want as the Speaker of the House. Very exciting.

Al Sharpton.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 12, 2015, 11:14:06 PM
http://jezebel.com/university-of-texas-students-protest-open-carry-law-by-1736025107
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on October 13, 2015, 12:26:08 PM
http://jezebel.com/university-of-texas-students-protest-open-carry-law-by-1736025107

What if I use a gun for sexual pleasure?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 13, 2015, 04:06:06 PM
What if I use a gun for sexual pleasure?

How else are you going to conceal it?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 17, 2015, 03:47:02 PM
http://www.mtv.com/news/2353115/lindsay-lohan-2020-president/

Probably still a better idea than Trump.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 27, 2015, 08:55:37 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-republicans-introduce-bipartisan-budget-bill/2015/10/27/22f1c67e-7c6b-11e5-b575-d8dcfedb4ea1_story.html?tid=sm_fb
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on October 28, 2015, 10:30:17 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/house-republicans-introduce-bipartisan-budget-bill/2015/10/27/22f1c67e-7c6b-11e5-b575-d8dcfedb4ea1_story.html?tid=sm_fb

I imagine the left eats excrement on this, but at least we dont have to hear about it for 2 years.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on October 29, 2015, 01:00:52 AM
Paul Ryan will be a much more formidable and effective Speaker than Boenher ever was. Probably too much in-party bickering for him to go too wild, but his personality and the mandate he demanded will probably get him through two years looking pretty decent.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on October 29, 2015, 05:52:42 PM
Best article I've seen about Ahmed Mohamed.  All the initial reports were that he took a clock apart and put it back together.  Suddenly, though, as the story spread he built the clock and was the future of engineering.  Some perspective and insight is a good thing.  I still can't figure out why he's going to the White House (although I can.  I just hate the stupid reasoning of social media demanding rapidity of thought and action).

http://blogs.artvoice.com/techvoice/2015/09/17/reverse-engineering-ahmed-mohameds-clock-and-ourselves/

(http://static.wwtdd.com/uploads/2015/10/Ahmed-Mohamed-Time-Warning.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 16, 2015, 12:47:08 PM
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/g660/worst-members-of-congress-1110/?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on November 23, 2015, 06:33:04 PM
freak this kid's family.  I hope all the people who gargles his balls after the incident are ashamed.  They won't be, but they should be.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/ahmed-mohamed-demands-15m-compensation-for-homemade-clock-arrest-a6745706.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 23, 2015, 07:15:06 PM
Cool lawsuit, Ahmed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 23, 2015, 07:42:56 PM
freak this kid's family.  I hope all the people who gargles his balls after the incident are ashamed.  They won't be, but they should be.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/ahmed-mohamed-demands-15m-compensation-for-homemade-clock-arrest-a6745706.html

Hands up everybody who thinks that the family went looking for lawyers to say "what can you get me for this?".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 25, 2015, 01:04:22 PM
Not sure if this is quite the right thread for this, but it seems like good news.

http://www.goodnewsnetwork.org/veteran-homelessness-has-been-ended-in-virginia/#.VlX82YxtOAw.facebook
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 06, 2015, 10:54:18 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/prayer-cards-911-jon-stewart_566324d4e4b08e945fefc404?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 07, 2015, 06:23:04 AM

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/prayer-cards-911-jon-stewart_566324d4e4b08e945fefc404?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063

They should at least get access to veteran benefits. I think first responders to terrorist attacks should be labeled as veterans and given additional insurance, etc.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 07, 2015, 08:27:02 AM
They should at least get access to veteran benefits. I think first responders to terrorist attacks should be labeled as veterans and given additional insurance, etc.

How about labeling what it would be, first responder insurance and take it from there. I don't know why they would have to complicate it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 07, 2015, 09:20:18 AM

How about labeling what it would be, first responder insurance and take it from there. I don't know why they would have to complicate it.

I'm fine with that. I don't see why this is an issue really.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 07, 2015, 09:40:38 AM
I'm fine with that. I don't see why this is an issue really.

It shouldn't be but you know someone will try and phuck it up  and be quite successful.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on December 08, 2015, 02:19:00 PM
Quote
BBC Newsbeat Verified account
‏@BBCNewsbeat

This is why people are calling American businessman, Donald Trump, Lord Voldemort http://bbc.in/1OfxRLt 

Quote
J.K. Rowling ‏@jk_rowling 8h

J.K. Rowling Retweeted BBC Newsbeat

How horrible.  Voldemort was nowhere near as bad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 08, 2015, 02:30:01 PM
No video of the guy calling Obama a total hoo-ha live on Fox News? Disappointed in you guys
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 10, 2015, 12:15:40 AM
Who the freak is CJ Pearson and why did anyone give a excrement what a 14 year old had to say in the first place?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 10, 2015, 01:01:49 AM
Who the freak is CJ Pearson and why did anyone give a excrement what a 14 year old had to say in the first place?

The right has this insistence on just promoting the most bizarre mascots. This time it was a 14 year old black kid because well, he's 14 and with the young people, and black. Not surprised at this outcome in the least.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 10, 2015, 09:27:08 AM
Oh a teenager changes his views? Shocking. Hell I was a borderline communist in HS. Not that I have a excrement about politics, but thought the idea of communism was "pretty cool". Also doesn't help that in school teachers are mostly liberal and have no problem preaching about the evils of capitalism etc. At least in NYC public schools.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 10, 2015, 12:02:51 PM
Oh a teenager changes his views? Shocking. Hell I was a borderline communist in HS. Not that I have a excrement about politics, but thought the idea of communism was "pretty cool". Also doesn't help that in school teachers are mostly liberal and have no problem preaching about the evils of capitalism etc. At least in NYC public schools.

My 8th grade English teacher straight up told us how stupid and horrible Bush was on a regular basis.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 10, 2015, 12:11:42 PM
My 8th grade English teacher straight up told us how stupid and horrible Bush was on a regular basis.

In comparison to what we have now she was 1/2 right............The half right part could be in comparison to an orange.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on December 10, 2015, 01:23:09 PM
You guys should have gone to Catholic school.  It was all Republican values in a post-Reagan world.  Dole beat Clinton in a landslide in the school presidential election when I was in high school.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 10, 2015, 01:45:57 PM
You guys should have gone to Catholic school.  It was all Republican values in a post-Reagan world.  Dole beat Clinton in a landslide in the school presidential election when I was in high school.

Hahahahahaha.

No, public high school was all about what a piece of absolute excrement W was. At least my AP Gov and Politics teacher used to remind everyone while she was talking about how horrible W was that if only Gore carried his home state, this all could've been avoided. In other words, how flawed is Al Gore that his former constituents told him to freak off.

Btw, anyone see Dole give his thoughts about the election recently? The man is great, but asking his opinion on how to win a Presidential election is like asking Marv Levy the secret to winning a super bowl.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 10, 2015, 01:59:58 PM
You guys should have gone to Catholic school.  It was all Republican values in a post-Reagan world.  Dole beat Clinton in a landslide in the school presidential election when I was in high school.

Tommy and I are both NYC public/Catholic school hybrids.

I don't remember the atmosphere becoming much more conservative there. The English teachers were still all commie pinkos.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 10, 2015, 02:51:07 PM

Tommy and I are both NYC public/Catholic school hybrids.

I don't remember the atmosphere becoming much more conservative there. The English teachers were still all commie pinkos.

It definitely wasn't more republican. Politics was rarely brought up, except during religion class where we talked about the evils of abortion, etc. My AP Government teacher senior year was going on and on about how we should send troops to Kosovo. You know, military action is alright as long as a Democrat is the one advocating for it. There was a staunch republican in the class that was totally against it. Pretty sure each of their opinions reversed in 2003.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on December 10, 2015, 04:32:28 PM
My Physics teacher was, and still is, the most staunchly Republican man I have ever met.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 10, 2015, 04:44:37 PM
My Economics teacher was a hardline right winger who would often leave early to get to the track to place large bets, and would delight in showing the class large piles of cash that he had won.

My Sociology teacher was a yogurt-knitting hippy who insisted on the class calling her by her first name.

The two of them deeply, deeply disliked each other.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 10, 2015, 04:50:37 PM

My Economics teacher was a hardline right winger who would often leave early to get to the track to place large bets, and would delight in showing the class large piles of cash that he had won.

My Sociology teacher was a yogurt-knitting hippy who insisted on the class calling her by her first name.

The two of them deeply, deeply disliked each other.

I wonder if they ever hate fucked each other.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 10, 2015, 04:58:10 PM
I wonder if they ever hate fucked each other.

I can imagine he would be more into the idea than her, she wasn't terrible looking but he was a tall skinny bespectacled guy with terrible teeth and large hairy ears.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 10, 2015, 05:00:08 PM

I can imagine he would be more into the idea than her, she wasn't terrible looking but he was a tall skinny bespectacled guy with terrible teeth and large hairy ears.

Maybe she hate fucked him for being so ugly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 10, 2015, 05:09:07 PM
Blimey, the old fucker is still alive as well, or at least he was five years ago.

http://www.ilkleygazette.co.uk/news/news_local/8273576.Pedal_power_to_raise_cash_for_Ben/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 10, 2015, 06:49:44 PM

Blimey, the old fucker is still alive as well, or at least he was five years ago.

http://www.ilkleygazette.co.uk/news/news_local/8273576.Pedal_power_to_raise_cash_for_Ben/

Wow. He looks exactly as I pictured him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 18, 2015, 06:59:05 PM
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/911-bill-passes-congress_56742074e4b014efe0d51b50?ncid=fcbklnkushpmg00000063
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 20, 2015, 09:18:16 AM
http://www.reddit.com/r/technology/comments/3xj5fe/now_that_cisa_has_passed_here_are_some_tips_to/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 24, 2015, 09:52:13 PM
Because freak the First Amendment, right?

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2015/03/27/pkg-arizona-senator-church-attendance-mandatory.ktvk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 24, 2015, 09:55:06 PM

Because freak the First Amendment, right?

http://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2015/03/27/pkg-arizona-senator-church-attendance-mandatory.ktvk

Stopped caring when I read "state senator". Doesn't take much to get elected as a state senator. Pretty much just putting your name on the ballot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 24, 2015, 09:56:58 PM
Stopped caring when I read "state senator". Doesn't take much to get elected as a state senator. Pretty much just putting your name on the ballot.

I know, I just think it's hilarious that an elected politician would suggest mandating church attendance through legislation. I only come to your country on occasion to work and/or drink, and even I know that's not legal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 24, 2015, 10:01:36 PM

I know, I just think it's hilarious that an elected politician would suggest mandating church attendance through legislation. I only come to your country on occasion to work and/or drink, and even I know that's not legal.

Yeah there are tons of retarded elected officials. There's a reason for that though. All our intelligent people work in the private sector. That goes for most countries I guess.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 24, 2015, 10:02:36 PM
Yeah there are tons of retarded elected officials. There's a reason for that though. All our intelligent people work in the private sector. That goes for most countries I guess.

lolno

We'll get into this one next week. Happy non-denominational holidays to you and yours.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 24, 2015, 10:03:19 PM

lolno

We'll get into this one next week. Happy non-denominational holidays to you and yours.

Happy Kwanza, nigga!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 24, 2015, 10:04:43 PM
Happy Kwanza, nigga!

And a Merry freaking Hannukah to you too, my friend. Allahu Akbar.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 24, 2015, 10:05:13 PM
lolololol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on December 24, 2015, 10:50:47 PM
And a Merry freaking Hannukah to you too, my friend. Allahu Akbar.

Hannukah ended weeks ago you racist freak
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 24, 2015, 10:53:56 PM
Hannukah ended weeks ago you racist freak

It's so hard being politically correct these days.

Happy Festivus and freak you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on December 24, 2015, 10:56:29 PM
It's so hard being politically correct these days.

Happy Festivus and freak you.

I've resorted to, enjoy your things
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on December 25, 2015, 12:39:06 AM
I say Merry Christmas because freak anyone who doesn't take it as a positive greeting.  I don't think I've ever had a problem.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on December 25, 2015, 12:44:00 AM

I say Merry Christmas because freak anyone who doesn't take it as a positive greeting.  I don't think I've ever had a problem.

Hardly anyone does, but it annoys me that most companies decide that the risk of frivolous lawsuits isn't worth having their employees say Merry Christmas.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 25, 2015, 09:46:53 AM
I say Merry Christmas because freak anyone who doesn't take it as a positive greeting.  I don't think I've ever had a problem.

The person that has a problem with it you don't want to be friends with anyway. It's like culling the herd.

I am not Christian in the slightest, as everyone knows, and I thoroughly enjoy when people say Merry Xmas, why? Because it's an awesome fun holiday.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on December 25, 2015, 11:19:58 AM

Hardly anyone does, but it annoys me that most companies decide that the risk of frivolous lawsuits isn't worth having their employees say Merry Christmas.

I've never had an employee of any store not say Merry Christmas back, and I say it to everyone this time of year.  That includes a number of trips to Starbucks where there's an alleged war on Christmas.  Sorry you're a media sheep.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on December 25, 2015, 11:45:33 AM
Straw man
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 02, 2016, 08:57:24 PM
This story about the NSA wiretaps appears to have the possibility of being incredibly, brilliantly destructive on multiple levels.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 03, 2016, 12:00:08 AM
At least the EPA is doing an incredible job

http://www.nbcnews.com/news/other/climate-change-expert-sentenced-32-months-fraud-says-lying-was-f2D11768995

Quote
The EPA’s highest-paid employee and a leading expert on climate change was sentenced to 32 months in federal prison Wednesday for lying to his bosses and saying he was a CIA spy working in Pakistan so he could avoid doing his real job.
Quote
Beale said he was ashamed of his lies about working for the CIA, a ruse that, according to court records, began in 2000 and continued until early this year.
Quote
Beale pled guilty in September to bilking the government out of nearly $1 million in salary and other benefits over a decade. He perpetrated his fraud largely by failing to show up at the EPA for months at a time, including one 18-month stretch starting in June 2011 when he did “absolutely no work,” as his lawyer acknowledged in a sentencing memo filed last week.

Quote
Until he retired in April after learning he was under federal investigation, Beale, an NYU grad with a masters from Princeton, was earning a salary and bonuses of $206,000 a year, making him the highest paid official at the EPA. He earned more money than the agency’s administrator, Gina McCarthy, according to agency documents.

So this guy is the freaking highest paid employee at the EPA, doesn't go to work for a YEAR AND A HALF because he told them he was a CIA spy, and they still pay him 200k+ /yr

A perfect symbol of everything wrong with the govt
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 05, 2016, 09:40:22 PM
(http://images.tapatalk-cdn.com/16/01/05/7798aa65b513bcc1c2b6cdaea9c0fcb5.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 27, 2016, 09:47:57 AM
Can't say I didn't see this coming, but I was sort of hoping to Oregon thing would just go away.  The yokels that completely misunderstand the 2nd amendment are not going to be pleased.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/morning-mix/wp/2016/01/26/five-oregon-occupiers-arrested-one-person-killed-in-confrontation-with-police/?postshare=2021453874752426&tid=ss_fb
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on January 29, 2016, 07:08:03 AM
The FBI released the video of the shooting. The guy froze like an ice cube when he finally got his chance to shoot the Feds like he had been dreaming about.

Jumps out with his hands up and then seems to realize that goes against everything he said he would do and then reaches in his pocket and gets blasted.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 29, 2016, 07:48:43 AM
The FBI released the video of the shooting. The guy froze like an ice cube when he finally got his chance to shoot the Feds like he had been dreaming about.

Jumps out with his hands up and then seems to realize that goes against everything he said he would do and then reaches in his pocket and gets blasted.

It's OK, I'll do the work for you.

http://www.cnn.com/2016/01/28/us/oregon-wildlife-refuge-siege-arrests/

And I agree with your assessment - hard to claim anything other than a righteous kill when a member of a group who have made the threats they have reaches for a loaded firearm in front of law enforcement officers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 13, 2016, 04:15:50 PM
Scalia is dead
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 13, 2016, 04:18:32 PM
RIP fellow Xavier HS alumnus.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 13, 2016, 04:30:54 PM
Gonna have major consequences, especially with Obama in office.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 13, 2016, 04:54:29 PM

Gonna have major consequences, especially with Obama in office.

I hate how justices are politicized. The whole point of a judge is that they're blind to who they're judging, and go by the book. That's why lady justice is blindfolded. This idea that we need "diversity" or "different views and backgrounds" is dumb. The position of justice should just go to whoever is most qualified. That's why I was against the Sotomayor pick.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 13, 2016, 07:52:23 PM
1 down, 4 to go.  All 5 justices that single handedly created our current corrupt election landscape need to GTFO.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 13, 2016, 08:00:58 PM

1 down, 4 to go.  All 5 justices that single handedly created our current corrupt election landscape need to GTFO.

The dude hadn't even been buried yet and guys like you are acting as if we just took down ISIS.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 13, 2016, 08:26:50 PM
The dude hadn't even been buried yet and guys like you are acting as if we just took down ISIS.

He made no secret of the fact that his decisions were driven heavily by his devout Catholic beliefs. freak Catholicism and freak Scalia.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on February 13, 2016, 08:49:58 PM
ya, not gonna weep over him leaving the court.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 13, 2016, 08:52:19 PM

He made no secret of the fact that his decisions were driven heavily by his devout Catholic beliefs. freak Catholicism and freak Scalia.

JO User: "freak Islam."
JE: "Racist. Islam isn't bad. You're ignorant."

JE: "freak Catholicism."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 13, 2016, 09:14:21 PM

JO User: "freak Islam."
JE: "Racist. Islam isn't bad. You're ignorant."

JE: "freak Catholicism."

It's the religion of peace.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 13, 2016, 09:20:28 PM

It's the religion of peace.

Cue the "All organized religions are equally excrement." rant from JE.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on February 13, 2016, 09:38:22 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xwtdhWltSIg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 14, 2016, 02:26:00 AM
The dude hadn't even been buried yet and guys like you are acting as if we just took down ISIS.

The politicking from both sides immediately after is freaking disgusting.  As soon as the news got out, you had people on the left celebrating and politicians on the right immediately pledging to hold up his replacement for a damn year.  It took 8 months to seat Kennedy, and that included the entirety of the Bork disaster and the bizarro Douglas Ginsburg business.  They're going to stall the entire process for a damn year?  We're going to have to wait at least 15 months to get a new justice?

Find a damn middle of the road justice and seat his derriere.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 14, 2016, 05:28:29 AM
JO User: "freak Islam."
JE: "Racist. Islam isn't bad. You're ignorant."

JE: "freak Catholicism."
The moment you start demonizing Catholicism for the monstrous evils done by and on behalf of that religion the way you do Islam, you can have that argument.

And yes, you can have the all organized religions are cunts rant if you wish. They certainly have no place being used to form the basis of law, but it never caused that bigoted old piece of excrement a problem.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 14, 2016, 06:48:14 AM

The politicking from both sides immediately after is freaking disgusting.  As soon as the news got out, you had people on the left celebrating and politicians on the right immediately pledging to hold up his replacement for a damn year.  It took 8 months to seat Kennedy, and that included the entirety of the Bork disaster and the bizarro Douglas Ginsburg business.  They're going to stall the entire process for a damn year?  We're going to have to wait at least 15 months to get a new justice?

Find a damn middle of the road justice and seat his derriere.

I want to scream at me screen whenever I see that excrement. Justices are SUPPOSED TO BE IMPARTIAL. That's the whole Fuckn point of s justice. They're supposed to base their decisions on what the law states, not their own opinions. There's gotta be a better way to appoint judges.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on February 14, 2016, 10:29:12 AM
I want to scream at me screen whenever I see that excrement. Justices are SUPPOSED TO BE IMPARTIAL. That's the whole Fuckn point of s justice. They're supposed to base their decisions on what the law states, not their own opinions. There's gotta be a better way to appoint judges.

Citizens review board!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 14, 2016, 01:51:32 PM
I want to scream at me screen whenever I see that excrement. Justices are SUPPOSED TO BE IMPARTIAL. That's the whole Fuckn point of s justice. They're supposed to base their decisions on what the law states, not their own opinions. There's gotta be a better way to appoint judges.

I get that you didn't want a Latina woman on the bench.  I get that you don't want judges to legislate from the bench.  I'm fine with the second part.

4 of the remaining judges decided, with no possible connection to the founding laws of our country, that the richest 0.01% could buy elections.  I'm sorry if you cannot see that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 14, 2016, 01:55:08 PM
Find a damn middle of the road justice and seat his derriere.

I agree with this 100% but sadly that's still not how it's supposed to work.  Until yesterday we could say that there were 4 democrats and 5 republicans sitting on the bench.  SCOTUS has been party based as long as I have been alive, but I don't believe that was how was intended to be.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 14, 2016, 02:02:40 PM
http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/02/14/466725863/who-are-the-possible-candidates-to-fill-scalias-seat
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 14, 2016, 02:04:28 PM
I think it would be awesome if the republicans get their way, delay the new justice until the next president, and Hillary nominates Obama.

BOOM Headshot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 14, 2016, 07:24:26 PM

I think it would be awesome if the republicans get their way, delay the new justice until the next president, and Hillary nominates Obama.

BOOM Headshot.

(http://i.imgur.com/1wbgdEe.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 14, 2016, 09:03:20 PM
Elliot Spitzer has been accused of assaulting a woman at the Plaza Hotel. No charges have been filed and his spokesperson denies everything. Scandal!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 14, 2016, 09:37:03 PM
I think it would be awesome if the republicans get their way, delay the new justice until the next president, and Hillary nominates Obama.

BOOM Headshot.

I think a Hillary nominee would actually be better than what we would get with Obama. At least she would have to think about reelection, not to mention I think shes more "normal" in views than him.

Only god knows wtf Bernie Sanders would do though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 15, 2016, 01:59:34 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/1wbgdEe.gif)

Lolololol. Fen you never cease to blatantly display your far left fanaticism.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 15, 2016, 04:08:40 PM
Lolololol. Fen you never cease to blatantly display your far left fanaticism.

Mush less far left fanaticism, then taking a jab at the republicans that swear they will block any nomination from Obama.  You need to be careful what you wish for.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 15, 2016, 05:30:59 PM

Mush less far left fanaticism, then taking a jab at the republicans that swear they will block any nomination from Obama.  You need to be careful what you wish for.

You praying for a liberal judge is just as bad as the republicans wanting a conservative one. Judges aren't supposed to be partial to one party. It's disgusting how it's become, and you're just another sheep that marches to the beat of Democratic talking points.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 15, 2016, 06:42:14 PM
You praying for a liberal judge is just as bad as the republicans wanting a conservative one. Judges aren't supposed to be partial to one party. It's disgusting how it's become, and you're just another sheep that marches to the beat of Democratic talking points.

But they always have been, and its a shame.

Careful who you call sheep Tommy.  I would like to see a moderate judge that is beholden to neither party.  I would also like $50 million.  Better chance of the latter happening.

That being the case, yes, I would prefer a liberal leaning judge, if my other choice is another judge that legislates from the bench based on the bible, rather than the constitution.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 15, 2016, 07:04:11 PM
But they always have been, and its a shame.

Careful who you call sheep Tommy.  I would like to see a moderate judge that is beholden to neither party.  I would also like $50 million.  Better chance of the latter happening.

That being the case, yes, I would prefer a liberal leaning judge, if my other choice is another judge that legislates from the bench based on the bible, rather than the constitution.

Do you really need to say "liberal leaning"

Because I think we all know youd want them to do more than lean
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 15, 2016, 09:12:52 PM

You praying for a liberal judge is just as bad as the republicans wanting a conservative one. Judges aren't supposed to be partial to one party. It's disgusting how it's become, and you're just another sheep that marches to the beat of Democratic talking points.

Of course, but let's dispel once and for all with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn't know what he's doing. He knows exactly what he's doing. Barack Obama is undertaking a systematic effort to change this country, to make America more like the rest of the world. When I'm president of the United States, we are going to re-embrace all the things that made America the greatest nation in the world and we are going to leave our children with what they deserve: the single greatest nation in the history of the world.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 15, 2016, 09:26:38 PM
There's one thing I like more liberal than conservative and that's judges. I am sorry but some of the judges the Republicans put forward are just a hair's breath away from fascism.


I wasn't happy Scalia died but I am not sad he needs to be replaced and maybe replaced by more of a centrist because phuck that guys decisions. Too bad they can't replace Thomas, he was never fit to be a judge in the first place.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on February 15, 2016, 09:28:53 PM
I think a Hillary nominee would actually be better than what we would get with Obama. At least she would have to think about reelection, not to mention I think shes more "normal" in views than him.

Only god knows wtf Bernie Sanders would do though.

Appoint Karl Marx to the bench!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 15, 2016, 09:43:21 PM
Of course, but let's dispel once and for all with this fiction that Barack Obama doesn't know what he's doing. He knows exactly what he's doing. Barack Obama is undertaking a systematic effort to change this country, to make America more like the rest of the world. When I'm president of the United States, we are going to re-embrace all the things that made America the greatest nation in the world and we are going to leave our children with what they deserve: the single greatest nation in the history of the world.

My friends on the east coast, look to the skies and care for your families.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 16, 2016, 12:17:16 AM
I agree with this 100% but sadly that's still not how it's supposed to work.  Until yesterday we could say that there were 4 democrats and 5 republicans sitting on the bench.  SCOTUS has been party based as long as I have been alive, but I don't believe that was how was intended to be.

The Supreme Court has had political leanings since John Marshall, however it's difficult to say that it's party based by political allegiance.  Given that the Constitution is essentially a living document, and given that we've progressed waaaay past the point of the early justices who already had to deal with the challenging process of interpreting that document, it's no surprise that judges end up politicizing their arguments.  Having said that, I don't believe in calling any of the justices Democrats and Republicans.  They may be conservative or liberal, activist or restrained, but calling them party based ignores the way they've pushed through party changes.  Plus, a justice like Kennedy is pretty damn middle of the road.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 16, 2016, 12:50:02 AM
The Supreme Court has had political leanings since John Marshall, however it's difficult to say that it's party based by political allegiance.  Given that the Constitution is essentially a living document, and given that we've progressed waaaay past the point of the early justices who already had to deal with the challenging process of interpreting that document, it's no surprise that judges end up politicizing their arguments.  Having said that, I don't believe in calling any of the justices Democrats and Republicans.  They may be conservative or liberal, activist or restrained, but calling them party based ignores the way they've pushed through party changes.  Plus, a justice like Kennedy is pretty damn middle of the road.

If Obama nominates someone just I little tiny bit more liberal than Kennedy, and the Senate still sits on its hands, the republicans are in danger of losing the senate after only 2 years.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 16, 2016, 12:24:36 PM
I'm curious to know how SundayJack felt when news of Scalia broke. That guy seemed to be his hero.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 18, 2016, 11:22:33 PM
So just out of curiosity, how are we rationalizing Obama skipping out on the funeral of a sitting supreme court justice?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 18, 2016, 11:33:27 PM

So just out of curiosity, how are we rationalizing Obama skipping out on the funeral of a sitting supreme court justice?

To be fair he was no longer a sitting Supreme Court justice after he died.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 18, 2016, 11:46:05 PM
To be fair he was no longer a sitting Supreme Court justice after he died.

You know what I meant you leftist retard.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 18, 2016, 11:51:14 PM
You know what I meant you leftist retard.

Haha.

I agree that all presidents should go to a justice's funeral, but this isn't without precedent at least.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 19, 2016, 12:20:09 AM
So just out of curiosity, how are we rationalizing Obama skipping out on the funeral of a sitting supreme court justice?



I would hope no one is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 19, 2016, 12:22:44 AM
Haha.

I agree that all presidents should go to a justice's funeral, but this isn't without precedent at least.

W went when Rehnquist died while still a sitting member of the SC.  I don't recall the last time before that a justice died prior to retirement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 19, 2016, 01:29:54 AM
So just out of curiosity, how are we rationalizing Obama skipping out on the funeral of a sitting supreme court justice?



This is easy, you know in life,  1 queynte never gets along with anyone, now imagine 2 cunts and it's easy to see the alive queynte wants nothing to do with the dead one.



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 19, 2016, 11:19:03 AM

This is easy, you know in life,  1 queynte never gets along with anyone, now imagine 2 cunts and it's easy to see the alive queynte wants nothing to do with the dead one.

So you're saying the President of the USA can't rise above personal disagreements to do his freaking duty?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 19, 2016, 11:51:45 AM
So you're saying the President of the USA can't rise above personal disagreements to do his freaking duty?

Yeah he sucks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 19, 2016, 12:21:47 PM

So you're saying the President of the USA can't rise above personal disagreements to do his freaking duty?

That's asking a bit too much from a Nobel Peace prize winner.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 21, 2016, 12:43:52 PM
So you're saying the President of the USA can't rise above personal disagreements to do his freaking duty?

DOES NOT say in the constitution that a sitting president needs to got to a SCOTUS wake.

DOES say in the constitution that he needs to nominate a replacement ASAP.

On a side note, he met and paid his respects privately with the family.  And not for nothing, but isn't Scalia one of the justices that protested one of Obama's SOTUA?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 21, 2016, 12:53:24 PM
DOES NOT say in the constitution that a sitting president needs to got to a SCOTUS wake.

DOES say in the constitution that he needs to nominate a replacement ASAP.

On a side note, he met and paid his respects privately with the family.  And not for nothing, but isn't Scalia one of the justices that protested one of Obama's SOTUA?

The Constitution doesn't say he has to nominate a replacement ASAP.  It simply says he has the power to nominate candidates to fill vacancies in the Supreme Court, etc.  There's nothing in the Constitution about expediency.  It's expected that he do so in a timely fashion, just like it should be expected that as the Head of State, he should do things like attend the funeral of a sitting SC justice.  Like I said, now isn't the time to worry about personal or political disagreement.  Put on a good face and then nominate his replacement.  Let the other party look bad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 21, 2016, 01:42:30 PM
The Constitution doesn't say he has to nominate a replacement ASAP.  It simply says he has the power to nominate candidates to fill vacancies in the Supreme Court, etc.  There's nothing in the Constitution about expediency.  It's expected that he do so in a timely fashion, just like it should be expected that as the Head of State, he should do things like attend the funeral of a sitting SC justice.  Like I said, now isn't the time to worry about personal or political disagreement.  Put on a good face and then nominate his replacement.  Let the other party look bad.

You missed a spot.  Scalia preferred to skip the State of the Union address.  'He should do things like attend' those.  Obama met privately with the family to pay his respects.

'Let the other party look bad.'  This is my point.  Scalia was a pawn of the republican party.  All this crap about about he was adamant about preserving the constitution is utter nonsense.  Revisionist history would be a generous way of putting it.  The republican appointees to SCOTUS worship the bible, not the constitution.  Where in either document it tells them that corporations should be able to buy elections is beyond my understanding, as I am not an expert in either publication.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 21, 2016, 01:54:58 PM

You missed a spot.  Scalia preferred to skip the State of the Union address.  'He should do things like attend' those.  Obama met privately with the family to pay his respects.

'Let the other party look bad.'  This is my point.  Scalia was a pawn of the republican party.  All this crap about about he was adamant about preserving the constitution is utter nonsense.  Revisionist history would be a generous way of putting it.  The republican appointees to SCOTUS worship the bible, not the constitution.  Where in either document it tells them that corporations should be able to buy elections is beyond my understanding, as I am not an expert in either publication.

How is that any different than the other party nominating a justice to push their own agenda? You can hate one side all you want, but don't think for a second you're not just a shill for the other side.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 21, 2016, 02:11:16 PM
How is that any different than the other party nominating a justice to push their own agenda? You can hate one side all you want, but don't think for a second you're not just a shill for the other side.

This would be as ignorant as me calling you 'a shill' for the republicans.  Nothing in life is that black and white, and you know it, so stop saying stupid excrement like this.  I am 'a shill' for my family, the people I care about, and what I believe, based on my decades of experience, is best for them.

You were gargling Scalia's balls for being an unbiased constitution worshiper.  I am calling bullshit on that.  I provided a ruling that had nothing to do with the constitution, and everything to do with republican money, and you keep ignoring it.  Show me who on the liberal side of the court is pushing a non-constitutional agenda.  Just give me one example for us to debate and I will at the very least respect your opinion.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 21, 2016, 02:14:54 PM
And not for nothing, but the founding fathers were progressive liberals by today's standards, so think on that for a bit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on February 21, 2016, 02:38:27 PM
And not for nothing, but the founding fathers were progressive liberals by today's standards, so think on that for a bit.

They owned slaves.....so no.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 21, 2016, 02:41:05 PM

This would be as ignorant as me calling you 'a shill' for the republicans.  Nothing in life is that black and white, and you know it, so stop saying stupid excrement like this.  I am 'a shill' for my family, the people I care about, and what I believe, based on my decades of experience, is best for them.

You were gargling Scalia's balls for being an unbiased constitution worshiper.  I am calling bullshit on that.  I provided a ruling that had nothing to do with the constitution, and everything to do with republican money, and you keep ignoring it.  Show me who on the liberal side of the court is pushing a non-constitutional agenda.  Just give me one example for us to debate and I will at the very least respect your opinion.

When did I say Scalia was unbiased? I was making a general statement about how justices aren't supposed to be biased, yet every president appoints one that their party wants. It should be the one non partisan branch in the government. Like when Sotomayor was being nominated the left kept whining about how the court needs Hispanic perspective. Why? There shouldn't be any perspective outside of what's written in the constitution. There's a reason why lady justice is blindfolded.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 21, 2016, 06:24:30 PM

When did I say Scalia was unbiased? I was making a general statement about how justices aren't supposed to be biased, yet every president appoints one that their party wants. It should be the one non partisan branch in the government. Like when Sotomayor was being nominated the left kept whining about how the court needs Hispanic perspective. Why? There shouldn't be any perspective outside of what's written in the constitution. There's a reason why lady justice is blindfolded.

Like I said, it has always been partisan.  Marshall was the first judicial activist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 21, 2016, 06:26:48 PM

You missed a spot.  Scalia preferred to skip the State of the Union address.  'He should do things like attend' those.  Obama met privately with the family to pay his respects.

'Let the other party look bad.'  This is my point.  Scalia was a pawn of the republican party.  All this crap about about he was adamant about preserving the constitution is utter nonsense.  Revisionist history would be a generous way of putting it.  The republican appointees to SCOTUS worship the bible, not the constitution.  Where in either document it tells them that corporations should be able to buy elections is beyond my understanding, as I am not an expert in either publication.

I'm certainly not supporting Scalia.  I don't recall anyone in here saying he was a great Justice.  I'm just saying that I expect the President to be better than that.  The "but he did" arguments don't work in that regard.  We've had the office dumbed down for a long time, but I'll always expect better.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 21, 2016, 06:38:17 PM

Like I said, it has always been partisan.  Marshall was the first judicial activist.

Of course it has, but I wish it weren't. Of course there's really no way for it not to be non-partisan.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 21, 2016, 07:24:43 PM

They owned slaves.....so no.

Yeah, but still.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 21, 2016, 08:19:26 PM
Of course it has, but I wish it weren't. Of course there's really no way for it not to be non-partisan.

Sure there is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Appointments_Commission
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 21, 2016, 08:20:33 PM
Sure there is.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judicial_Appointments_Commission

Are you saying none of them have any sort of political leaning in their judgment and legal interpretation?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 21, 2016, 08:24:51 PM
Are you saying none of them have any sort of political leaning in their judgment and legal interpretation?

No, of course not. But they aren't placed in their jobs by people with a specific political agenda, so judicial appointments tend not to be made based on such criteria.

I actually don't think your system is too far off being a really good idea, I'd just make it a stipulation that the only representatives who get to vote on a Presidential appointment to SCOTUS are those of the opposing party to the President, with an impartial oversight committee that determines whether nominations and rejections are reasonable. That way you're pretty much guaranteed to get middle of the road appointments.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 24, 2016, 07:03:13 PM
http://www.ktvu.com/news/96074190-story

Anti-gun CA state senator convicted of gun trafficking and racketeering
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 29, 2016, 09:58:26 PM
I'll just leave this here so the MSNBC crowd can fap to it.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/fox-news-host-bill-o-reilly-loses-custody-of-his-children-after-alleged-domestic-violence-incident-a6904336.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on February 29, 2016, 10:53:10 PM
Still the best produced editorial show on TV.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 01, 2016, 10:10:08 AM
Still the best produced editorial show on TV.

If it was on Comedy Central replacing the Colbert Report, and was satire, I would agree.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on March 01, 2016, 10:22:33 AM
They owned slaves.....so no.

a lot of people still would if it were legal......so possibly?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 01, 2016, 10:22:47 AM
I'll just leave this here so the MSNBC crowd can fap to it.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/fox-news-host-bill-o-reilly-loses-custody-of-his-children-after-alleged-domestic-violence-incident-a6904336.html

I would probably be part of "the MSNBC crowd", but I like Bill O'Reilly despite disagreeing vehemently with some of his positions and I would be very sad to find out that he had a side like this to him. Also, domestic violence knows no party affiliations and should be roundly condemned by everyone with no regards for politics.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on March 01, 2016, 10:27:01 AM
I would probably be part of "the MSNBC crowd", but I like Bill O'Reilly despite disagreeing vehemently with some of his positions and I would be very sad to find out that he had a side like this to him. Also, domestic violence knows no party affiliations and should be roundly condemned by everyone with no regards for politics.

well, its been rumored hes a nightmare to be around. his meltdowns on youtube are possibly only the tip of the iceberg

but im not for crucifying people in marriage settlements and child custody since theyre a distorted mess.

i will say it wouldnt shock me if theres truth to it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 01, 2016, 10:43:49 AM
Bill O'Reilly is a freaking tool.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 01, 2016, 04:35:49 PM
I would probably be part of "the MSNBC crowd", but I like Bill O'Reilly despite disagreeing vehemently with some of his positions and I would be very sad to find out that he had a side like this to him. Also, domestic violence knows no party affiliations and should be roundly condemned by everyone with no regards for politics.

This is a great post.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 01, 2016, 04:36:56 PM
If it was on Comedy Central replacing the Colbert Report, and was satire, I would agree.

We'll have to agree to disagree.  His control of his audience is masterful, and it's due entirely to brilliant production.  The guy is very, very good at what he does.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 01, 2016, 08:06:35 PM
http://www.sexycongress.net/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 01, 2016, 08:13:50 PM

http://www.sexycongress.net/

Hahahahahaha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 02, 2016, 09:56:27 AM
http://www.sexycongress.net/

Some real Sophie's Choices in there.  Yikes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 02, 2016, 10:19:42 AM
Some real Sophie's Choices in there.  Yikes.

I've been trying to click through to get Elise Stefanik or Tulsi Gabbard, but neither has popped up yet.  I think it's rigged.  How many different times can I click "Anyone but Nancy Pelosi"?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on March 02, 2016, 10:28:29 AM
I always wonder who comes up with half this excrement. Regardless made me laugh so a high five to its creator
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on March 02, 2016, 10:57:49 AM
my new spank bank lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 02, 2016, 11:50:46 AM
I've been trying to click through to get Elise Stefanik or Tulsi Gabbard, but neither has popped up yet.  I think it's rigged.  How many different times can I click "Anyone but Nancy Pelosi"?

I got Gabbard pretty quickly after I filtered it to women only.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 02, 2016, 11:51:18 AM
Some real Sophie's Choices in there.  Yikes.

Just like the general election.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 12, 2016, 08:04:50 AM
Make sure you read the whole article.

http://www.syracuse.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/03/syracuse_diner_makes_national_news_for_its_dictator_obama_egg_special.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 12, 2016, 08:17:55 AM
Make sure you read the whole article.

http://www.syracuse.com/politics/index.ssf/2016/03/syracuse_diner_makes_national_news_for_its_dictator_obama_egg_special.html

That's awesome.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: casman02 on March 12, 2016, 10:17:52 AM
Phil Mattingly ‏@Phil_Mattingly  25m25 minutes ago
Introducing Donald Trump: former Ohio State great/New York Jets All-Pro Center Nick Mangold
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on March 12, 2016, 10:24:42 AM
I'm not too surprised.  He stumped for Romney in 2012.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on March 29, 2016, 08:46:50 AM
CA raising minimum wage to $15/hr by 2022. Which is dumb.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 29, 2016, 08:52:54 AM
CA raising minimum wage to $15/hr by 2022. Which is dumb.

Why? Every time implementation of or an increase to the minimum wage is proposed there are apocalyptic predictions, and every time they prove to be completely false. What makes this different?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on March 29, 2016, 08:56:24 AM
Why? Every time implementation of or an increase to the minimum wage is proposed there are apocalyptic predictions, and every time they prove to be completely false. What makes this different?

It's not an apocalyptic prediction, it'll just end up hurting small businesses and the void left from that will be taken over by the bigger businesses, e.g. Wal-Mart, who ironically the people who campaign for this type of thing rally against.

Minimum wage increase drive low skilled workers out of the workforce too since it makes it much harder for them to compete against those who already made $15/hr. There's a reason that socialist havens in Scandinavia have had their workers' unions rally against minimum wage laws (and they still don't have them), and that's because it hurts workers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 29, 2016, 08:59:08 AM
CA raising minimum wage to $15/hr by 2022. Which is dumb.

My first part time job when i was high school paid minimum wage...it was $5.25/hr.  This was back in 1994.

In American funds, that would've been 30 cents.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 29, 2016, 09:02:45 AM
It's not an apocalyptic prediction, it'll just end up hurting small businesses and the void left from that will be taken over by the bigger businesses, e.g. Wal-Mart, who ironically the people who campaign for this type of thing rally against.

Minimum wage increase drive low skilled workers out of the workforce too since it makes it much harder for them to compete against those who already made $15/hr. There's a reason that socialist havens in Scandinavia have had their workers' unions rally against minimum wage laws (and they still don't have them), and that's because it hurts workers.

Same old tired argument. There's literally no good data to support that (and the right wing attacks on Seattle have already been disproven as being based on bad/selective data, so don't bother with that one). In principle there might even be some truth to it, but unfortunately the right wing in general have cried wolf so many times now on minimum wage and been wrong EVERY SINGLE TIME, so I'm not inclined to give the rhetoric a fair listen any more.

Let's see what happens over the next couple of years in Seattle before we form any kind of actual firm opinion on whether it's a good idea or not for California to aim for a target six years away.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on March 29, 2016, 09:04:12 AM
Same old tired argument. There's literally no good data to support that (and the right wing attacks on Seattle have already been disproven as being based on bad/selective data, so don't bother with that one). In principle there might even be some truth to it, but unfortunately the right wing in general have cried wolf so many times now on minimum wage and been wrong EVERY SINGLE TIME, so I'm not inclined to give the rhetoric a fair listen any more.

Let's see what happens over the next couple of years in Seattle before we form any kind of actual firm opinion on whether it's a good idea or not for California to aim for a target six years away.

Sorry, I forgot right wing argument = bad argument
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 29, 2016, 09:07:39 AM
Sorry, I forgot right wing argument = bad argument

No, that's not what I said. I even accepted that there might be some truth to it. What I said is that the argument has been made, and been proven incorrect, a lot of times already. Of course there's an upper limit for a minimum wage past which point the benefits are outweighed by negative impacts, but given we haven't yet reached that point despite every single implementation of MW being greeted with howls of terror about the impending financial apocalypse coming from the right, the argument has less weight through its dilution.

This is what happens when we allow politicians to rule through rhetoric rather than reason. If the right wing wants its arguments to be listened to it needs to stop making spurious ones based on ideology rather than facts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on March 29, 2016, 09:14:34 AM
No, that's not what I said. I even accepted that there might be some truth to it. What I said is that the argument has been made, and been proven incorrect, a lot of times already. Of course there's an upper limit for a minimum wage past which point the benefits are outweighed by negative impacts, but given we haven't yet reached that point despite every single implementation of MW being greeted with howls of terror about the impending financial apocalypse coming from the right, the argument has less weight through its dilution.

This is what happens when we allow politicians to rule through rhetoric rather than reason. If the right wing wants its arguments to be listened to it needs to stop making spurious ones based on ideology rather than facts.

I'm not arguing that a moderate increase in the minimum wage can never help. Rather (and I probably should have phrased this better) such a drastic increase in a very populous and large state will likely hurt, even if it raises over a 5-year period
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 29, 2016, 09:19:47 AM

No, that's not what I said. I even accepted that there might be some truth to it. What I said is that the argument has been made, and been proven incorrect, a lot of times already. Of course there's an upper limit for a minimum wage past which point the benefits are outweighed by negative impacts, but given we haven't yet reached that point despite every single implementation of MW being greeted with howls of terror about the impending financial apocalypse coming from the right, the argument has less weight through its dilution.

This is what happens when we allow politicians to rule through rhetoric rather than reason. If the right wing wants its arguments to be listened to it needs to stop making spurious ones based on ideology rather than facts.

Can you provide examples of where it has been proven incorrect?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 29, 2016, 09:34:19 AM
Can you provide examples of where it has been proven incorrect?

Yes. The implementation of the minimum wage in the UK by the Blair government in 1999. The Conservative Party mounted a heavy and sustained campaign to tell the populace how terrible it would be, how it was a death knell for business small and large alike, and how it would lead to increased unemployment as employers were saddled with unmanageable wage bills. You know, the usual anti-MW argument.

Between 1997 and 2010, the UK's GDP per capita outperformed any other country in the G6 annd unemployment levels remained at unprecedented low levels.

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/uk-growth-and-productivity-1997-to-2008/

http://www.statista.com/statistics/279898/unemployment-rate-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 29, 2016, 09:52:14 AM
Can you provide examples of where it has been proven incorrect?

This is the Glen Beck argument.  Can you prove to me that Wendy doesn't hate the Smurfs?

The burden of proof should always be on the prosecution.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 29, 2016, 09:53:00 AM

Yes. The implementation of the minimum wage in the UK by the Blair government in 1999. The Conservative Party mounted a heavy and sustained campaign to tell the populace how terrible it would be, how it was a death knell for business small and large alike, and how it would lead to increased unemployment as employers were saddled with unmanageable wage bills. You know, the usual anti-MW argument.

Between 1997 and 2010, the UK's GDP per capita outperformed any other country in the G6 annd unemployment levels remained at unprecedented low levels.

http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/politicsandpolicy/uk-growth-and-productivity-1997-to-2008/

http://www.statista.com/statistics/279898/unemployment-rate-in-the-united-kingdom-uk/

I ask for an example, and you provide me with one from a completely different country.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 29, 2016, 09:53:28 AM

This is the Glen Beck argument.  Can you prove to me that Wendy doesn't hate the Smurfs?

The burden of proof should always be on the prosecution.

So just do it and hope for the best?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 29, 2016, 09:54:10 AM
I ask for an example, and you provide me with one from a completely different country.

Well, he could provide you data from the US, if you know we, I don't know...  Raised the minimum wage?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 29, 2016, 09:56:52 AM
I ask for an example, and you provide me with one from a completely different country.

LOL. I forgot that economic principles are different in the US, because you're special. By this token, you're presumably also dismissing Jumbo's referencing of Scandinavian workers' unions being anti-MW (BTW, I'd like to see a citation for this - I'm not doubting him but I couldn't find anything about it with a cursory Google search) on the basis of the fact that it has no relevance to the US, given your whole specialness thing you've got going on?

Can you cite me an example of where the minimum wage has demonstrably had a negative impact upon the economy?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on March 29, 2016, 10:10:30 AM
LOL. I forgot that economic principles are different in the US, because you're special. By this token, you're presumably also dismissing Jumbo's referencing of Scandinavian workers' unions being anti-MW (BTW, I'd like to see a citation for this - I'm not doubting him but I couldn't find anything about it with a cursory Google search) on the basis of the fact that it has no relevance to the US, given your whole specialness thing you've got going on?

Can you cite me an example of where the minimum wage has demonstrably had a negative impact upon the economy?

http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/31/europe-minimum-wage-lifestyle-wages.html

“The unions there felt that a national minimum wage would interfere with collective bargaining, and it might even bring the price of labor down"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 29, 2016, 10:18:28 AM
http://www.forbes.com/2009/08/31/europe-minimum-wage-lifestyle-wages.html

“The unions there felt that a national minimum wage would interfere with collective bargaining, and it might even bring the price of labor down"

Thanks. I presume then that, having cited the Scandinavian model and the opposition of the workers' unions to minimum wage based upon their concern of a potential downward pressure on wages, you are also going to accept the entirety of their argument which is that the downward pressure would be caused because there is such a successful communion of industry and unions, and you are in fact advocating for far stronger unions in the US and the type of collective bargaining that is the preference of the Nordic countries?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on March 29, 2016, 10:21:01 AM
Thanks. I presume then that, having cited the Scandinavian model and the opposition of the workers' unions to minimum wage based upon their concern of a potential downward pressure on wages, you are also going to accept the entirety of their argument which is that the downward pressure would be caused because there is such a successful communion of industry and unions, and you are in fact advocating for far stronger unions in the US and the type of collective bargaining that is the preference of the Nordic countries?

I don't really have a problem with unions as long as people aren't forced to join them if they don't want to
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 29, 2016, 10:23:05 AM
I don't really have a problem with unions as long as people aren't forced to join them if they don't want to

That's fair, although if wages are determined through collective bargaining then it's not really much of a choice. I don't know enough about the make up of unions in that region to know how they work or how far their remit extends, but like most other things in Scandinavia I suspect it's all pretty organised and reasonable and fair.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 31, 2016, 09:49:49 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/31/hero-lawmaker-urges-colleagues-to-stop-saying-physical-when-they-mean-fiscal/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 01, 2016, 08:34:14 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2016/03/31/hero-lawmaker-urges-colleagues-to-stop-saying-physical-when-they-mean-fiscal/

That's fantastic, a politician with a sense of humor.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: eyedea on April 05, 2016, 09:22:00 AM
https://youtu.be/DDtjYgDpdfU
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 03, 2016, 08:32:17 PM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/04/nyregion/sheldon-silver-ex-new-york-assembly-speaker-gets-12-year-prison-sentence.html

Enjoy dying in prison.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 04, 2016, 11:40:27 AM
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/04/nyregion/sheldon-silver-ex-new-york-assembly-speaker-gets-12-year-prison-sentence.html

Enjoy dying in prison.

Good riddance.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on May 05, 2016, 01:53:52 PM
California raised the smoking age from 18 to 21 because.... who the hell knows
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 05, 2016, 02:03:52 PM
California raised the smoking age from 18 to 21 because.... who the hell knows

Because they want to reduce the number of people who smoke and legislation has proven to be pretty effective at doing that?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 05, 2016, 02:23:23 PM
Because they want to reduce the number of people who smoke and legislation has proven to be pretty effective at doing that?

But why?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 05, 2016, 02:23:59 PM
But why?

Because dead people don't pay taxes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on May 05, 2016, 02:38:35 PM
Because dead people don't pay taxes.

But why?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on May 05, 2016, 02:44:29 PM
But why male models?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 05, 2016, 06:21:59 PM
I believe the smoking age in Suffolk County is 21 and it's like 19 or 20 in Nassau

I don't know excrement about the city though

Well actually that's the minimum age to sell someone cigarettes, I just presume it's the same age to smoke them
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 05, 2016, 06:32:10 PM
I believe the smoking age in Suffolk County is 21 and it's like 19 or 20 in Nassau

I don't know excrement about the city though

Well actually that's the minimum age to sell someone cigarettes, I just presume it's the same age to smoke them

As far as I know it's still 18 in the city.

What you just said surprises me since Long Island seems to be the home of the cliche high school smoker.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 05, 2016, 06:34:20 PM
So now college weed dealers will also have cartons of cigarettes on their menu.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 05, 2016, 06:36:48 PM
So now college weed dealers will also have cartons of cigarettes on their menu.

Daniel Pantaleo will always be there to stop them with lethal force.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on May 05, 2016, 06:45:23 PM
Daniel Pantaleo will always be there to stop them with lethal force.

Lol

I hope that wop dies of asphyxiation by BBC
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on May 07, 2016, 12:26:19 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/ocOzpaB.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on May 10, 2016, 05:56:06 AM
(http://i.imgur.com/ocOzpaB.png)

Haha I feel like I make this post once a week
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 10, 2016, 01:43:04 PM
http://gizmodo.com/former-facebook-workers-we-routinely-suppressed-conser-1775461006?rev=1462799465508
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 10, 2016, 02:42:40 PM

http://gizmodo.com/former-facebook-workers-we-routinely-suppressed-conser-1775461006?rev=1462799465508

How shocking.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on May 10, 2016, 02:53:07 PM
All of Facebook is curated.  It's a fake world in which people craft their own images of themselves and people feel free to say all the excrement they would never say in public even though their names are attached.  It's no surprise that Facebook itself decided to curate itself in a more meta way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 19, 2016, 01:47:38 PM
Unless I'm missing the point here, Paul Ryan just imploded in a cloud of his own rhetoric.

Quote
A chaotic scene unfolded on the floor of the U.S. House on Thursday as a measure to ensure federal contractors can’t discriminate against LGBT people was defeated by a single vote.

Quote
"I don't know the answer. I don't even know,” Ryan said. "This is federalism; the states should do this. The federal government shouldn't stick its nose in its business."

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/05/19/3779986/house-republicans-include-lgbt-discrimination-in-ndaa/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 19, 2016, 07:50:43 PM
Unless I'm missing the point here, Paul Ryan just imploded in a cloud of his own rhetoric.

http://thinkprogress.org/politics/2016/05/19/3779986/house-republicans-include-lgbt-discrimination-in-ndaa/

Issa vexes me. For every four things he does that I like, he does five things I don't like.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 19, 2016, 08:14:08 PM
http://www.wsj.com/articles/would-the-u-s-drop-the-bomb-again-1463682867

Kind of scary reading something like this
Shows you how freaking stupid the average American is, and why it might be a good thing if the average person couldn't vote.

And as much as people would like to just blame Republicans (whose numbers in the poll are much higher)  even the Democrats numbers are really high.

There's no hope for American politics
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on May 19, 2016, 08:36:30 PM
http://www.wsj.com/articles/would-the-u-s-drop-the-bomb-again-1463682867

Kind of scary reading something like this
Shows you how freaking stupid the average American is, and why it might be a good thing if the average person couldn't vote.

And as much as people would like to just blame Republicans (whose numbers in the poll are much higher)  even the Democrats numbers are really high.

There's no hope for American politics

As long as you acknowledge that you're a prime candidate for disenfranchisement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 19, 2016, 08:39:15 PM

http://www.wsj.com/articles/would-the-u-s-drop-the-bomb-again-1463682867

Kind of scary reading something like this
Shows you how freaking stupid the average American is, and why it might be a good thing if the average person couldn't vote.

And as much as people would like to just blame Republicans (whose numbers in the poll are much higher)  even the Democrats numbers are really high.

There's no hope for American politics

It's stupid to compare public opinion anyway. In 1945 most of the people polled probably had a close relative in the army or out in the pacific. Most polled now probably never knew anyone who fought.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 19, 2016, 08:41:16 PM
As long as you acknowledge that you're a prime candidate for disenfranchisement.

Say what you want about my poor verbiage and word choices, but I think I'm more than reasonable politically. I think logical reasonable human beings (aka no politician in this country) could find a middle ground on almost every single issue that would keep people happy plus do the "right" thing.

And honestly I'd gladly give up my right to vote if it meant every Republican and Democrat in politics would be out of office for life
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 19, 2016, 08:43:16 PM
It's stupid to compare public opinion anyway. In 1945 most of the people polled probably had a close relative in the army or out in the pacific. Most polled now probably never knew anyone who fought.

I believe the point of the article was that around 80% of Republicans and 50% of Democrats would have no problems dropping a nuclear bomb on Iran if they attacked a US naval carrier and inflicted casualties similar to pearl Harbor (around 2500 dead)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 19, 2016, 08:53:29 PM

I believe the point of the article was that around 80% of Republicans and 50% of Democrats would have no problems dropping a nuclear bomb on Iran if they attacked a US naval carrier and inflicted casualties similar to pearl Harbor (around 2500 dead)

Meh. Polls are done to create stories. I'm sure they were very selective of the polling areas.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 19, 2016, 08:59:01 PM
Meh. Polls are done to create stories. I'm sure they were very selective of the polling areas.

Possibly. But it wasnt a "Ooh the Republicans are bad" kind of poll. Republicans were terrible, Democrats were horrible too.

I dont know if i believe those numbers, but its still scary if they're even relatively accurate
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on May 19, 2016, 10:52:21 PM
Say what you want about my poor verbiage and word choices, but I think I'm more than reasonable politically. I think logical reasonable human beings (aka no politician in this country) could find a middle ground on almost every single issue that would keep people happy plus do the "right" thing.

And honestly I'd gladly give up my right to vote if it meant every Republican and Democrat in politics would be out of office for life

No.  You tend far more often to follow an irrational path than a reasonable one.  You throw about lazy stereotypes as solid evidence and overreact frequently.  The above was even a relatively tame example.  Obviously you're not always illogical, but taken as a whoIe, I don't consider you politically reasonable..
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on May 19, 2016, 10:59:03 PM
Meh. Polls are done to create stories. I'm sure they were very selective of the polling areas.

Polls in general are not done to create stories.  Statisticians are not journalists.  Neither are scientists.  This one, though, commissioned by WSJ, was obviously done in search of a story.

Having said that, if the firm they contracted was selective of polling areas and forced bias into the poll, it wouldn't be a leading firm for long.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on May 23, 2016, 04:51:03 PM
If you ever want to know why idiots on the right are nutjobs, just look at some beloved sources:

http://americanactionnews.com/articles/how-obama-is-using-the-transgendered-lifestyle-to-shut-down-hospitals

The ones on the left are no less funny.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 23, 2016, 05:35:48 PM

If you ever want to know why idiots on the right are nutjobs, just look at some beloved sources:

http://americanactionnews.com/articles/how-obama-is-using-the-transgendered-lifestyle-to-shut-down-hospitals

The ones on the left are no less funny.

A whopping 30 shares on Facebook, too.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on May 24, 2016, 08:29:20 AM
A whopping 30 shares on Facebook, too.

AAN has a massive email list, which is its primary means of distribution.  It's a fairly antiquated delivery system, but it's what they use.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on May 24, 2016, 08:34:56 AM
Also about 800k likes on FB, which means it is showing up in a ton of feeds.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on June 28, 2016, 01:42:43 PM
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/27/out-of-pocket-hospital-costs-rose-between-2009-and-2013.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 28, 2016, 02:48:08 PM
http://www.cnbc.com/2016/06/27/out-of-pocket-hospital-costs-rose-between-2009-and-2013.html

Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhocking.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on June 28, 2016, 03:06:28 PM
Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhocking.

You won't believe what happened to the price of healthcare between 2009 and 2013!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 28, 2016, 04:38:25 PM
You won't believe what happened to the price of healthcare between 2009 and 2013!

2011 will shock you!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on June 28, 2016, 05:07:38 PM
Rant incoming:

I love our health care system. I work for a small business so I have to buy my coverage through Obamacare. Granted, it's not great, but I pay about $300 a month for myself as a healthy male in my late 20s.

I went to an in-coverage Gastroenterologist to figure out some internal issues. Paid my $75 copay. Had a 5 minute chat with the doctor after filling out paperwork for 30 min and getting my height/weight measured. He says I should get an endoscopy and colonoscopy.

Eh, fair enough, they tell me they will call my insurance to arrange finances. Insurance calls back and says they will cover exactly $0 and that I will have to pay out of pocket until I hit my $3,000 deductible, at which point I pay 50/50. I tell them freak that, I'll do without the procedures. I'm not going to spend potentially north of $5k out of pocket to MAYBE find something wrong.

Get a new bill in the mail for $300 for the doctor's consultation. The total was $500, insurance decided they can cover $200. I called to appeal because I literally sat there for 5 minutes with the doctor and answered a few questions. This before the insurance company said they cannot cover a penny of the in-network procedures. Who the freak knows what the result of that will be, and to put a nice cherry on top, my appeals call was cut short due to a freaking emergency fire drill at the insurance building.

All in all I've spent about $400 to find out nothing except to waste my own time.

I love our health care. Best in the world.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 28, 2016, 05:18:57 PM
Rant incoming:

I love our health care system. I work for a small business so I have to buy my coverage through Obamacare. Granted, it's not great, but I pay about $300 a month for myself as a healthy male in my late 20s.

I went to an in-coverage Gastroenterologist to figure out some internal issues. Paid my $75 copay. Had a 5 minute chat with the doctor after filling out paperwork for 30 min and getting my height/weight measured. He says I should get an endoscopy and colonoscopy.

Eh, fair enough, they tell me they will call my insurance to arrange finances. Insurance calls back and says they will cover exactly $0 and that I will have to pay out of pocket until I hit my $3,000 deductible, at which point I pay 50/50. I tell them freak that, I'll do without the procedures. I'm not going to spend potentially north of $5k out of pocket to MAYBE find something wrong.

Get a new bill in the mail for $300 for the doctor's consultation. The total was $500, insurance decided they can cover $200. I called to appeal because I literally sat there for 5 minutes with the doctor and answered a few questions. This before the insurance company said they cannot cover a penny of the in-network procedures. Who the freak knows what the result of that will be, and to put a nice cherry on top, my appeals call was cut short due to a freaking emergency fire drill at the insurance building.

All in all I've spent about $400 to find out nothing except to waste my own time.

I love our health care. Best in the world.

Pay Bojanglesman 50 bucks at the tailgate and he will do a colonoscopy for you. It will save you thousands.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 28, 2016, 05:25:24 PM
By way of comparison, my 63 year old Mum was having some trouble eating at Christmas time. She went to her GP, who referred her to a specialist. Took a couple of weeks to get that appointment. Mid Jan, the specialist tells her that he thinks she has a tumour, but he wants to do a laporoscopic inspection. Another two weeks. Late Jan, she has the check and a couple of weeks after that, after several specialists conferred, they told her that she had a large cancerous tumour at the junction of her oesophagus and stomach and they were going to have to treat her pretty aggressively.

Within a month she had met with an oncologist and started a three month course of chemotherapy. At the end of the chemo she had another laporoscopic inspection, and was scheduled for operation in early June. On June 9th she was opened up by one of Europe's leading gastro surgeons (I'm sure there's a proper term for that but I don't know what it is) who removed her entire stomach, and attached her small intestine directly to her oesophagus. Two days in Critical Care with a dedicated nurse sitting at the end of the bad at all times monitoring the various machines, then a week on the recovery ward. Yesterday she had a follow up appointment with the surgeon who said that they had done extensive tissue tests, the surgery couldn't have gone any better and they believe that she is completely cancer free.

Total bill: $0. And we're constantly told that the downside of that system is the extensive waiting time and poor quality of care, but I can tell you that at no point have either of those things been even remotely in evidence.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 28, 2016, 05:48:53 PM
Rant incoming:

I love our health care system. I work for a small business so I have to buy my coverage through Obamacare. Granted, it's not great, but I pay about $300 a month for myself as a healthy male in my late 20s.

I went to an in-coverage Gastroenterologist to figure out some internal issues. Paid my $75 copay. Had a 5 minute chat with the doctor after filling out paperwork for 30 min and getting my height/weight measured. He says I should get an endoscopy and colonoscopy.

Eh, fair enough, they tell me they will call my insurance to arrange finances. Insurance calls back and says they will cover exactly $0 and that I will have to pay out of pocket until I hit my $3,000 deductible, at which point I pay 50/50. I tell them freak that, I'll do without the procedures. I'm not going to spend potentially north of $5k out of pocket to MAYBE find something wrong.

Get a new bill in the mail for $300 for the doctor's consultation. The total was $500, insurance decided they can cover $200. I called to appeal because I literally sat there for 5 minutes with the doctor and answered a few questions. This before the insurance company said they cannot cover a penny of the in-network procedures. Who the freak knows what the result of that will be, and to put a nice cherry on top, my appeals call was cut short due to a freaking emergency fire drill at the insurance building.

All in all I've spent about $400 to find out nothing except to waste my own time.

I love our health care. Best in the world.

Now consider that as a single young man you have it easier than pretty much every other demo when it comes to health care expenses.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on June 28, 2016, 05:50:31 PM
Now consider that as a single young man you have it easier than pretty much every other demo when it comes to health care expenses.
Exactly.. I couldn't imagine if I had a pregnant spouse or terminal condition
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on July 02, 2016, 12:03:31 AM
http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-pol-sac-essential-politics-updates-gov-brown-signs-six-gun-control-bills-1467394282-htmlstory.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on July 02, 2016, 07:31:49 AM
Yeah, as a fellow healthy young man I never realized how fucked all this excrement was until dealing with pregnancy stuff. You just do whatever they say because you want mom and baby to be taken care of and just hope the bill isn't out of control. We had a preterm labor scare that was a few days hospital stay, the birth, and then our daughter got RSV which is basically just a cold but at two weeks old is a major deal. 3 hospital stays all came with a decent bill and she's actually got very good insurance compared to most people.

Whole thing is fucked because Americans would rather do this excrement than pay a slightly higher tax rate. Everyone will need quality healthcare at some point in their life and not needing to worry about a bill makes it so much easier to focus on doing the right thing medically instead of counting pennies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 02, 2016, 08:01:09 AM
Yeah, as a fellow healthy young man I never realized how fucked all this excrement was until dealing with pregnancy stuff. You just do whatever they say because you want mom and baby to be taken care of and just hope the bill isn't out of control. We had a preterm labor scare that was a few days hospital stay, the birth, and then our daughter got RSV which is basically just a cold but at two weeks old is a major deal. 3 hospital stays all came with a decent bill and she's actually got very good insurance compared to most people.

Whole thing is fucked because Americans would rather do this excrement than pay a slightly higher tax rate. Everyone will need quality healthcare at some point in their life and not needing to worry about a bill makes it so much easier to focus on doing the right thing medically instead of counting pennies.

There are arguments both ways.  Who knows what is the best.  The argument supporting what is done in the US is that, regardless of the cost, you can get done what needs to be done quickly.  Like you said, people seem to like the idea that they can get "fixed" quickly and deal with the fallout financially later.  Who knows if that is true anymore and costs (what is paid by insurance and the patient) are ridiculous.  That being said, I have no idea how universal healthcare would look in the US.  The concern most have is that you would potentially have to wait forever to have treatments/diagnostics done because you have less control over the situation.  Again, I have no experience with universal health care, so who knows.  Plus, many would argue that putting our government 100% in charge of anything is a terrible idea.  Many Americans imagine massively crowded doctor's offices, ERs, and hospitals with huge lines and no hope of being seen within 6 months for any condition from diarrhea all the way to cancer.  I know that is stupid, but it's what 'muricans think. 

Bottom line, as shitty as our current system is and how badly it needs to be fixed, I still don't know for sure that universal health care as administered by a US government would be better.  Full disclosure, I have insurance through my wife's employer (state of Virginia, because my employer's plan is really expensive) and it is outstanding.  Never once had to get anything approved first.  Virtually no limitation on who I can see.  Rates are low because the state pays a huge chunk of it as an employee benefit.  I am fully aware that this is not the norm and I thank my lucky stars. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 02, 2016, 08:16:10 AM
Honest question for you Canadians, British, etc.  In places where there is universal health care, is there a thriving business for doctors on retainer that you can pay out of pocket and be seen on demand outside of the healthcare system?  I assume there are no regulations against something like this.  Are there also hospitals where you can pay full price outside of the healthcare system for the ability to be seen ASAP and control your medical decisions?  I would figure rich people would be willing to pay for something like this to insure they can be seen ASAP for any fart, sniffle, tumor and STD they might acquire along the way.  Can you imagine Donald Trump waiting in a public ER to be treated for strep throat?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 02, 2016, 09:11:07 AM
Rant incoming:

I love our health care system. I work for a small business so I have to buy my coverage through Obamacare. Granted, it's not great, but I pay about $300 a month for myself as a healthy male in my late 20s.

I went to an in-coverage Gastroenterologist to figure out some internal issues. Paid my $75 copay. Had a 5 minute chat with the doctor after filling out paperwork for 30 min and getting my height/weight measured. He says I should get an endoscopy and colonoscopy.

Eh, fair enough, they tell me they will call my insurance to arrange finances. Insurance calls back and says they will cover exactly $0 and that I will have to pay out of pocket until I hit my $3,000 deductible, at which point I pay 50/50. I tell them freak that, I'll do without the procedures. I'm not going to spend potentially north of $5k out of pocket to MAYBE find something wrong.

Get a new bill in the mail for $300 for the doctor's consultation. The total was $500, insurance decided they can cover $200. I called to appeal because I literally sat there for 5 minutes with the doctor and answered a few questions. This before the insurance company said they cannot cover a penny of the in-network procedures. Who the freak knows what the result of that will be, and to put a nice cherry on top, my appeals call was cut short due to a freaking emergency fire drill at the insurance building.

All in all I've spent about $400 to find out nothing except to waste my own time.

I love our health care. Best in the world.

Obamacare really is complete excrement. I'm not sure what the purpose was, to say that they "gave"  everyone healthcare?

So many of the Obamacare plans are basically high deductible plans. You get a somewhat reasonable monthly payment,  then have like a 3-6k annual deductible you need to hit first before the insurance even kicks in.

To make matters worse it sounds like the care you're seeking could possibly even  be preventative in nature.

That said I guess high deductible plans make sense for young healthy people since they tend to generally not need them.

But at the same time why even have health insurance if it won't kick in until you spent North of 7,000$.

For all intents and purposes most of these Obamacare plans are basically akin to catastrophic insurance plans
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 02, 2016, 09:23:20 AM
Honest question for you Canadians, British, etc.  In places where there is universal health care, is there a thriving business for doctors on retainer that you can pay out of pocket and be seen on demand outside of the healthcare system?

In Canada this isn't allowed. GPs are all self employed but you can't contract directly with them, they are paid by the local healthcare provider. (At least that's the case in Ontario, it's possible other provinces have different rules but I don't think so.) In the UK it is possible but it's extremely expensive.

Quote
I assume there are no regulations against something like this.  Are there also hospitals where you can pay full price outside of the healthcare system for the ability to be seen ASAP and control your medical decisions? I would figure rich people would be willing to pay for something like this to insure they can be seen ASAP for any fart, sniffle, tumor and STD they might acquire along the way.  Can you imagine Donald Trump waiting in a public ER to be treated for strep throat?

You can go the private route for elective surgeries such as cosmetic procedures, but there is no option in Canada for purchasing private healthcare. The UK has a private option but again it's phenomenally expensive. Why would you go to an ER for strep throat though? ER is for emergencies. I know that Americans have this terror that a public healthcare system would mean that it would immediately be engulfed by millions of undocumented immigrants demanding their free breast augmentations, but the reality is that providing healthcare free at the point of access means that people take preventative measures and end up costing the system far less than if they wait until bits are falling off before they see a professional.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on July 02, 2016, 09:36:53 AM
The example is right in this thread. Pope would have gotten some preventative care if it wasn't going to cost him thousands of dollars. Instead he is just going to do what I would do in that situation and just hope it wasn't anything to begin with. If it does turn out to be something real he is going to be worse off financialy and medically.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 02, 2016, 05:05:38 PM
In Canada this isn't allowed. GPs are all self employed but you can't contract directly with them, they are paid by the local healthcare provider. (At least that's the case in Ontario, it's possible other provinces have different rules but I don't think so.) In the UK it is possible but it's extremely expensive.

You can go the private route for elective surgeries such as cosmetic procedures, but there is no option in Canada for purchasing private healthcare. The UK has a private option but again it's phenomenally expensive. Why would you go to an ER for strep throat though? ER is for emergencies. I know that Americans have this terror that a public healthcare system would mean that it would immediately be engulfed by millions of undocumented immigrants demanding their free breast augmentations, but the reality is that providing healthcare free at the point of access means that people take preventative measures and end up costing the system far less than if they wait until bits are falling off before they see a professional.

I do think a compromise would be very possible if both parties weren't so freaking stubborn.

Combine immigration and healthcare reform all into one package. Reducing entitlement spending, illegal immigration, increased tax revenue  (from less illegals working off the books) and you could pay for a chunk of healthcare with the savings. Legalize Marijuana and tax the freak out of it incorporated into that bill and we really could have a much better system for comparable cost

Pure universal health care probably won't happen but I think some kind of hybrid approach (like Obama care)  But better is feasible
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 03, 2016, 01:17:03 PM
And/or cut defense spending by 20%.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 05, 2016, 08:56:24 PM
What a douche.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/07/05/484817551/illinois-man-is-arrested-after-burning-u-s-flag-wont-face-charges
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 05, 2016, 08:57:58 PM
What a douche.

http://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2016/07/05/484817551/illinois-man-is-arrested-after-burning-u-s-flag-wont-face-charges

I saw this earlier. I think that the idea of having a law against burning flags is slightly absurd, but then I also think that people who feel the need to do it in order to make some kind of statement are a bit pathetic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 05, 2016, 09:52:18 PM
Apparently there's a bipartisan bill working it's way through the circuit to force labeling of GMOs. There's already a bill that I (think?) was passed in Vermont.

Ridiculous this stupid excrement

http://www.burlingtonfreepress.com/story/news/2016/07/05/proposed-gmo-law-goes-senate/86733416/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 13, 2016, 01:29:44 PM
Quote
Source — Democratic Rep. Corrine Brown of Florida suggested on Friday that, if agents investigating her had instead spent their time investigating the man who killed 49 people at an Orlando nightclub in June, the massacre could have been prevented.

“These are the same agents that was not able to do a thorough investigation of the agent, and we ended up with 50 people dead,” Brown said, referring to [the terrorist].

Brown made the comments after being indicted on charges that she and her chief of staff used a college scholarship fund as a “personal slush fund.”

Brown’s lawyer, Elizabeth White, made a similar remark following the indictment.

“Perhaps had it chosen to devote its resources more thoughtfully, 50 innocent people would be alive today,” White said of the government, according to a report from local outlet First Coast News.

On Sunday, Brown also raised eyebrows with a blog post wherein she appeared to compare her appearance in court to the shootings of Alton Sterling, Philando Castile, and five police officers in Dallas.

“Last week was very rough,” she wrote. “Two black men were needlessly gunned down by police; five Dallas police officers were slain by a demented man, and on Friday I had to appear in federal court.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 13, 2016, 01:40:25 PM
freaking hell. What a clown.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 13, 2016, 01:43:50 PM
I think we need to issue licenses to talk. Apparently it can't be done freely with any sense or decency at all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 13, 2016, 04:36:55 PM
I think we need to issue licenses to talk. Apparently it can't be done freely with any sense or decency at all.

This person was elected to talk. By her constituents.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on July 13, 2016, 05:44:50 PM
This person was elected to talk. By her constituents.

Obviously we had to limit the size of both houses of Congress, but man, having one rep for 500k - 1 million people sure results in some apathetic voters electing shitty reps.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 13, 2016, 05:47:02 PM
Obviously we had to limit the size of both houses of Congress, but man, having one rep for 500k - 1 million people sure results in some apathetic voters electing shitty reps.

Congratulations on explaining the careers of such people as Peter King and Sheila Jackson-Lee.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 02, 2016, 08:40:22 PM
http://spectator.org/the-obama-administration-pays-ransom-to-iran/

The WSJ alleges that Obama essentially paid Iran the biggest ransom of all time

Now Trump is an absolute buffoon and worlds greatest used carsalesman. But excrement like this from Obama (whether its true or just looks really bad) gives people like Trump so much power.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 02, 2016, 09:07:52 PM
http://spectator.org/the-obama-administration-pays-ransom-to-iran/

The WSJ alleges that Obama essentially paid Iran the biggest ransom of all time

Now Trump is an absolute buffoon and worlds greatest used carsalesman. But excrement like this from Obama (whether its true or just looks really bad) gives people like Trump so much power.

Why not just link to the WSJ article?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 02, 2016, 09:15:04 PM
Why not just link to the WSJ article?

Because you need to have an account to read past the first paragraph
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 02, 2016, 09:30:36 PM
Because you need to have an account to read past the first paragraph

When you click on shared links on social media you can get hit with the paywall more easily. If you just look up the article and go to it directly it should be fine. Worked for me.

http://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-sent-cash-to-iran-as-americans-were-freed-1470181874
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 09, 2016, 02:33:21 PM
Quote
Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) is the proud new owner of a summer home in the Champlain Islands, Seven Days has confirmed.

The Burlington resident last week plopped down nearly $600,000 on a lakefront camp in North Hero.

Sanders’ new crib has four bedrooms and 500 feet of Lake Champlain beachfront on the east side of the island — facing Vermont, not New York. The Bern will keep his home in Burlington and use the new camp seasonally.

1%er


http://m.sevendaysvt.com/OffMessage/archives/2016/08/08/bernie-sanders-buys-a-summer-home-in-north-hero
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 09, 2016, 04:34:53 PM
1%er


http://m.sevendaysvt.com/OffMessage/archives/2016/08/08/bernie-sanders-buys-a-summer-home-in-north-hero

Please tell me you posted this as bait for dcm
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on August 09, 2016, 05:33:18 PM
1%er


http://m.sevendaysvt.com/OffMessage/archives/2016/08/08/bernie-sanders-buys-a-summer-home-in-north-hero

I'm tired of these millionays
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 09, 2016, 05:46:23 PM
To be fair you don't necessarily have to be a millionaire to buy a $600k home. Apartments in fuckn Astoria cost more than that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on August 09, 2016, 05:53:32 PM
Plus if you have the money why not?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 09, 2016, 05:57:10 PM
WE GOTTA BREAK UP DA BIG BANKS
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 09, 2016, 06:08:52 PM
To be fair you don't necessarily have to be a millionaire to buy a $600k home. Apartments in fuckn Astoria cost more than that.

Still waiting for someone to explain how this is hypocritical.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 09, 2016, 06:13:55 PM
Btw I'm surprised no one brought up the fact that Obama and the Dems have been praising his Iran Deal as a sign of improving relations when we had to secretly airdrop more than half a billion dollars to get our guys back.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 09, 2016, 06:25:00 PM
Btw I'm surprised no one brought up the fact that Obama and the Dems have been praising his Iran Deal as a sign of improving relations when we had to secretly airdrop more than half a billion dollars to get our guys back.

Like any Democrat controversy, the dyed in the wool Dems basically decided that isn't a thing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 09, 2016, 06:30:33 PM
To be fair you don't necessarily have to be a millionaire to buy a $600k home. Apartments in fuckn Astoria cost more than that.
Buy or mortgage?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on August 09, 2016, 06:36:11 PM
Btw I'm surprised no one brought up the fact that Obama and the Dems have been praising his Iran Deal as a sign of improving relations when we had to secretly airdrop more than half a billion dollars to get our guys back.

It wasn't a ransom. It was a scheduled payment as part of a settlement of a decades-old lawsuit relating to the freezing of Iranian assets held in the U.S. during the Iranian hostage crisis. The only reason the money was airlifted instead of transfered was because Congress banned money transfers to Iran and the only reason the money exchange coincided with the prisoner transfer was so that the Iranian government could frame it as a ransom to its people in order to prevent civil unrest.

I wouldn't expect you to know any of this since you probably get most of your news from Fox or the New York Post and are too lazy to do any research yourself.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on August 09, 2016, 06:40:48 PM
The series of payments were announced in January of last year. You can look it up if you're interested.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 09, 2016, 06:43:17 PM
The series of payments were announced in January of last year. You can look it up if you're interested.

It was because Iran wanted some favorable fantasy football trades.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on August 09, 2016, 06:45:32 PM
It was because Iran wanted some favorable fantasy football trades.

Obama totally got trade raped in the Iran deal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 09, 2016, 06:46:50 PM
Still waiting for someone to explain how this is hypocritical.
dcm should have been here by now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 09, 2016, 06:58:25 PM
Andrew Ryan in here owning souls.

How do we all feel about Trump totally not inciting assassination?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 09, 2016, 08:45:04 PM
Andrew Ryan in here owning souls.

How do we all feel about Trump totally not inciting assassination?

Meh
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on August 09, 2016, 08:59:29 PM
Reading 4chan and r/the_donald about Hillary Clinton and the foundation. If true could lead to some major charges.

I would link but just click on the highest scoring link in the R/the_donald subreddit about WikiLeaks and DNC Leaks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 09, 2016, 09:02:13 PM
To be fair you don't necessarily have to be a millionaire to buy a $600k home. Apartments in fuckn Astoria cost more than that.
Still waiting for someone to explain how this is hypocritical.

Its his 3rd freaking house.

Owning a 600k house doesnt make you rich, it makes you middle class, maybe upper middle class depending on where you live.

But this is his 3rd home and this isnt even his primary, its a summer home.

All the waah waah bullshit about how tough he had it growing up, and he was always poor. And how rich people are the devil. And this guy is easily in the 1%
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on August 09, 2016, 09:03:41 PM
Here are the links:

4chan supposed FBI analyst about Clinton, the foundation, and corruption: http://imgur.com/a/lFHx3
Wikileaks thread in the_donald: https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/4wzjjb/breaking_julian_assange_suggests_murdered_dnc/?st=iro923rh&sh=36dc19b7

Note, I am not a Trump fan, I just think it's funny how a meme may become the freaking POTUS
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 09, 2016, 09:09:04 PM
Here are the links:

4chan supposed FBI analyst about Clinton, the foundation, and corruption: http://imgur.com/a/lFHx3
Wikileaks thread in the_donald: https://www.reddit.com/r/The_Donald/comments/4wzjjb/breaking_julian_assange_suggests_murdered_dnc/?st=iro923rh&sh=36dc19b7

Note, I am not a Trump fan, I just think it's funny how a meme may become the freaking POTUS

LOLOLOLOL

Really? Anonymous conspiracy nuts on 4chan and Julian Assange? Go back to lazy half-assed racist garbage.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 09, 2016, 09:09:54 PM
Its his 3rd freaking house.

Owning a 600k house doesnt make you rich, it makes you middle class, maybe upper middle class depending on where you live.

But this is his 3rd home and this isnt even his primary, its a summer home.

All the waah waah bullshit about how tough he had it growing up, and he was always poor. And how rich people are the devil. And this guy is easily in the 1%

That's a fallacious argument. Basically no congressman or senator could ever advocate for policies that would benefit the poor (and the middle class) because they're automatically hypocrites by your standard.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on August 09, 2016, 09:10:57 PM
LOLOLOLOL

Really? Anonymous conspiracy nuts on 4chan and Julian Assange? Go back to lazy half-assed racist garbage.
Read the 4chan thread then come back and insult me if you want
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 09, 2016, 09:12:16 PM
Read the 4chan thread then come back and insult me if you want

The one you linked? With the anonymous guy claiming to be a high level government analyst and providing absolutely zero evidence to back it up?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 09, 2016, 09:14:03 PM
A 600K house where I live is definitely upper class.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on August 09, 2016, 09:14:25 PM
The one you linked? With the anonymous guy claiming to be a high level government analyst and providing absolutely zero evidence to back it up?
No the one that I will shove in your face when I break your eye socket at the tailgate
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on August 09, 2016, 09:15:47 PM
A 600K house where I live is definitely upper class.

600k buys half of winnipeg and control of the native population.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on August 09, 2016, 09:16:17 PM
No the one that I will shove in your face when I break your eye socket at the tailgate

what
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 09, 2016, 09:16:55 PM
600k buys half of winnipeg and control of the native population.
How about the cheese dust cartel?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 09, 2016, 09:17:27 PM
That's a fallacious argument. Basically no congressman or senator could ever advocate for policies that would benefit the poor (and the middle class) because they're automatically hypocrites by your standard.

Theyre only hypocrites if they base their campaign on millionaires and billionares being evil and ruling the world.

The others are just bad
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on August 09, 2016, 09:17:41 PM
what

Dont worry pooe only shows up half way through the first quarter of the game.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 09, 2016, 09:17:44 PM
No the one that I will shove in your face when I break your eye socket at the tailgate

Go take a timeout.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on August 09, 2016, 09:20:46 PM
How about the cheese dust cartel?

we don't speak publicly about that

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 09, 2016, 10:02:40 PM
Theyre only hypocrites if they base their campaign on millionaires and billionares being evil and ruling the world.

The others are just bad

Implying they don't rule the world?

Not gonna address the evil thing since nobody is seriously making that claim.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 09, 2016, 11:11:53 PM

Implying they don't rule the world?

Not gonna address the evil thing since nobody is seriously making that claim.

I don't hate Bernie, but you have to admit that some of his rhetoric was a little out there. He didn't call the rich evil, but he painted a picture of the U.S like it's pre-Revolutionary France.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 10, 2016, 05:38:39 AM
Implying they don't rule the world?

Not gonna address the evil thing since nobody is seriously making that claim.

He didn't say they were evil, but absolutely implied it

Essentially all of Americas problems can be traced back to greedy billionaires
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 10, 2016, 05:59:53 AM


Essentially all of Americas problems can be traced back to greedy billionaires

See, now you're getting it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 10, 2016, 08:30:41 AM

See, now you're getting it.


Clas warfare doesn't solve problems.

Things can be better if people realize that a win win is possible

There's no reason you can't offer tax incentives thst will encourage growing businesses and creating new jobs (which benefits companies by giving them essentially more workers with better value)  and benefits workers by having more opprotunities.

Instead you got this stupid derriere class warfare where the left just attacks the rich.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 10, 2016, 08:37:50 AM
Trump

(http://www.finishedmodels.com/images/products/detail/S0153.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on August 10, 2016, 11:50:21 AM
There's no reason you can't offer tax incentives thst will encourage growing businesses and creating new jobs (which benefits companies by giving them essentially more workers with better value)  and benefits workers by having more opprotunities.

Do you have any idea how large of a tax incentive the government would have to offer companies to stop outsourcing?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 10, 2016, 11:54:19 AM
Do you have any idea how large of a tax incentive the government would have to offer companies to stop outsourcing?
Throw in a couple of those Sports Illustrated football phones and call it a deal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on August 10, 2016, 12:01:08 PM
Do you have any idea how large of a tax incentive the government would have to offer companies to stop outsourcing?

What if the government asked them to stay reallllly nicely?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 10, 2016, 12:50:38 PM
Do you have any idea how large of a tax incentive the government would have to offer companies to stop outsourcing?

I understand that you're not gonna get shoe factories to open back up and sweat shops and excrement. But the more attractive you make jobs in America, the more jobs they will offer. I'm pretty sure there's some kind of straight forward economic concept and graft to support that  theory .

I'm not talking about tax breaks specifically for the rich or anything. But rather straight forward  incentives for companies. For example huge tax write offs for training a new employee, maybe even tax deductions for hiring new people as well. I'm not gonna pretend to know the answer but you can find a way to make everyone happy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on August 10, 2016, 01:07:21 PM
Yup, everyone  could be happy but as a country we just don't do that thing that would fix all problems. Enlightening analysis as usual.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 10, 2016, 01:23:35 PM
I understand that you're not gonna get shoe factories to open back up and sweat shops and excrement. But the more attractive you make jobs in America, the more jobs they will offer. I'm pretty sure there's some kind of straight forward economic concept and graft to support that  theory .

I'm not talking about tax breaks specifically for the rich or anything. But rather straight forward  incentives for companies. For example huge tax write offs for training a new employee, maybe even tax deductions for hiring new people as well. I'm not gonna pretend to know the answer but you can find a way to make everyone happy

Here's the funny thing, those things already exist. It's called corporation tax, and if you take on a new employee or buy a new piece of machinery or open up a new offices all of those things are deductible against corporate tax. The bleating about how high corporate taxes kill employment is absolute horseshit, because high corporate taxes actually encourage greater employment. Low corporate tax discourages investment and encourages profiteering.

What would be interesting if it were achievable would be a tiered tax system that allows corporations to claim higher tiers of relief based upon demonstrable proportions of investment i.e. if you can show that your company invested in a certain amount of increased domestic employment, staff training etc, you can claim a discount off your corporate tax rate, thus rewarding your investment of a proportion of gross profit by allowing the company to keep a greater proportion of the net.

I should caveat this by saying that my knowledge of the finer nuances of corporate tax is far from comprehensive, and it may exist to some degree already.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on August 10, 2016, 01:27:54 PM
As a country, we have to give up this dream of bringing manufacturing jobs back to the states. They're never coming back.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 10, 2016, 02:15:58 PM
What they can do is repatriate US dollars.There's at least a trillion dollars offshore they can easily bring back to US soil. The last time they gave a grace period to repatriate offshore dollars, the U.S economy picked up like crazy, 2005 I believe.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 10, 2016, 04:11:42 PM
Ouch.

https://thinkprogress.org/christie-aides-text-messages-implicate-senior-staff-in-bridgegate-controversy-4f237b1f9f24#.377ymb35h
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 10, 2016, 04:16:55 PM
What they can do is repatriate US dollars.There's at least a trillion dollars offshore they can easily bring back to US soil. The last time they gave a grace period to repatriate offshore dollars, the U.S economy picked up like crazy, 2005 I believe.

Isn't this a big thing of Trumps?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on August 10, 2016, 05:12:53 PM
Ouch.

https://thinkprogress.org/christie-aides-text-messages-implicate-senior-staff-in-bridgegate-controversy-4f237b1f9f24#.377ymb35h

Good.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 10, 2016, 07:55:36 PM
Isn't this a big thing of Trumps?

LOL no idea I don't give a freak what his policies are,  I  wouldn't vote for him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 10, 2016, 09:13:02 PM
LOL no idea I don't give a freak what his policies are,  I  wouldn't vote for him.

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/02/wall-street-likes-trumps-repatriation-holiday-idea.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 10, 2016, 09:17:47 PM

http://www.cnbc.com/2016/08/02/wall-street-likes-trumps-repatriation-holiday-idea.html

That's actually a really good idea.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 10, 2016, 09:54:24 PM
That's actually a really good idea.

Yes it is, it should be done regardless of party or ideology.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 16, 2016, 09:05:39 PM
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/business/economy/aetna-decision-exposes-weaknesses-in-obamas-health-care-law/2016/08/16/3bed308e-63d1-11e6-8b27-bb8ba39497a2_story.html&ved=0ahUKEwiIr8yBrsfOAhWCnRoKHQwkAUkQiJQBCBswAA&usg=AFQjCNHgEgceKH64V-u-iIBTfVZLf744qg&sig2=wiOO97-r4lmUo11moa2rnw

Obamacare is essentially failing

And the options are basically going to be public insurance, or increase the penalties for people who don't get Obamacare.

I imagine that Trump being such a epic fuckup is going to move this nation closer to public option
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on August 17, 2016, 03:04:40 AM
https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&url=https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/business/economy/aetna-decision-exposes-weaknesses-in-obamas-health-care-law/2016/08/16/3bed308e-63d1-11e6-8b27-bb8ba39497a2_story.html&ved=0ahUKEwiIr8yBrsfOAhWCnRoKHQwkAUkQiJQBCBswAA&usg=AFQjCNHgEgceKH64V-u-iIBTfVZLf744qg&sig2=wiOO97-r4lmUo11moa2rnw

Obamacare is essentially failing

And the options are basically going to be public insurance, or increase the penalties for people who don't get Obamacare.

I imagine that Trump being such a epic fuckup is going to move this nation closer to public option

Relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFoXyFmmGBQ
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 17, 2016, 02:44:55 PM
The left is attack Aetna hardcore. Saying they left Obamacare to "punish"  them.

I think how involved the left gets with private business is so fucked up and appalling. Aetna has lost over 400 million in the exchanges since 2014, clearly they're not good for insurance companies
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 17, 2016, 03:55:48 PM
To be fair, Aetna is freaking horrible.

Source: my life
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 17, 2016, 05:13:17 PM
The left is attack Aetna hardcore. Saying they left Obamacare to "punish"  them.

I think how involved the left gets with private business is so fucked up and appalling. Aetna has lost over 400 million in the exchanges since 2014, clearly they're not good for insurance companies

It's almost like there's no sensible role for profit-driven insurance in public healthcare.....
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 17, 2016, 05:19:19 PM
It's almost like there's no sensible role for profit-driven insurance in public healthcare.....



Medicare and Medicaid are the only public healthcare in the USA

Obamacare is just hardcore regulations

The fact that they have to increasingly punish people to participate   and how much money these companies lose goes to show the truth about the exchanges
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 17, 2016, 05:41:06 PM
dcm is right. It's time to move to a true single payer system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on August 17, 2016, 05:49:42 PM
Relevant: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fFoXyFmmGBQ
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 17, 2016, 06:00:01 PM
Jumbo is right. It's time to move to a true single payer system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 17, 2016, 06:00:45 PM


Medicare and Medicaid are the only public healthcare in the USA

Obamacare is just hardcore regulations

The fact that they have to increasingly punish people to participate   and how much money these companies lose goes to show the truth about the exchanges

Public healthcare as in the system that delivers healthcare to members of the public.

But if you're making the argument that the insurance companies should be told to freak off so that your country can move to a single payer system, then yes. You are correct. It is obscene that shareholders make profits from taking money off the public and then doing everything they can to avoid delivering the service when it's needed.

I don't think that's your point though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on August 17, 2016, 06:02:30 PM
Dicks out for Harambe
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on August 17, 2016, 06:07:31 PM
I have been paying for insurance I use once a year since I got a full time job (the thing people who support social programs supposedly have never had). I have already been paying for people who are sicker than me to get their care AND for a ton of people to make a profit off my insurance company. I would much rather just pay in to a social system while I am young and healthy and not worry about how I'm going to pay for stuff I need when I am older and less healthy. Makes too much sense for the DCM's of the world to support.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 18, 2016, 07:46:10 AM
I have been paying for insurance I use once a year since I got a full time job (the thing people who support social programs supposedly have never had). I have already been paying for people who are sicker than me to get their care AND for a ton of people to make a profit off my insurance company. I would much rather just pay in to a social system while I am young and healthy and not worry about how I'm going to pay for stuff I need when I am older and less healthy. Makes too much sense for the DCM's of the world to support.

But where would the profit come from?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on August 18, 2016, 09:57:11 AM
I have been paying for insurance I use once a year since I got a full time job (the thing people who support social programs supposedly have never had). I have already been paying for people who are sicker than me to get their care AND for a ton of people to make a profit off my insurance company. I would much rather just pay in to a social system while I am young and healthy and not worry about how I'm going to pay for stuff I need when I am older and less healthy. Makes too much sense for the DCM's of the world to support.
This should be the entire debate right here.  Debate over.  Well said.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 18, 2016, 02:42:50 PM
Not into it unless it costs less
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on August 18, 2016, 03:34:09 PM
Not into it unless it costs less

Less when? Next week or over the course of the rest of your life?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 18, 2016, 06:07:05 PM
You already pay for poor people and old people to have insurance.  I can't imagine most of the people here would see worse healthcare costs if their employers stopped having to buy group insurance.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 18, 2016, 06:31:56 PM
If Trump and Clinton are the "best"  politicians that Republicans and Democrats can come up with how the freak you think they're gonna do any better fixing healthcare?

Our government is flat out freaking incompetent and that's a fact. Is our current system good, no its freaking not. But having a ton of corrupt politicians  "fix"  it won't make it better.

How many states pension plans are on the cusp of going bankrupt? There's been all kinds of discussions about buyouts and excrement for teachers because the government can't pay for it. Social security isn't solvency and is also fucked. Our country's debt is completely out of control and there's no feasible solution to paying it off. Government programs to encourage poor people buying homes they can't afford almost caused the greatest depression the world has ever seen. We have completely failed to combat global warming. It literally took them freaking months and months to get the freaking WEBPAGE for Obamacare to work.

Our government is absolutely positively incompetent and terrible at everything they do. If you genuinely think they are capable of fixing healthcare you're seriously freaking stupid. That's not to say that there aren't things they can do to point us in the right direction, but to put them in charge of healthcare for everybody is a diasaster.

I don't think the right has any idea how to fix healthcare than the left, so I don't want you to think they know what to do. I'd rather the government just stay the freak out of our affairs and not freak excrement up further
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on August 18, 2016, 06:38:40 PM
If Trump and Clinton are the "best"  politicians that Republicans and Democrats can come up with how the freak you think they're gonna do any better fixing healthcare?

Our government is flat out freaking incompetent and that's a fact. Is our current system good, no its freaking not. But having a ton of corrupt politicians  "fix"  it won't make it better.

How many states pension plans are on the cusp of going bankrupt? There's been all kinds of discussions about buyouts and excrement for teachers because the government can't pay for it. Social security isn't solvency and is also fucked. Our country's debt is completely out of control and there's no feasible solution to paying it off. Government programs to encourage poor people buying homes they can't afford almost caused the greatest depression the world has ever seen. We have completely failed to combat global warming. It literally took them freaking months and months to get the freaking WEBPAGE for Obamacare to work.

Our government is absolutely positively incompetent and terrible at everything they do. If you genuinely think they are capable of fixing healthcare you're seriously freaking stupid. That's not to say that there aren't things they can do to point us in the right direction, but to put them in charge of healthcare for everybody is a diasaster.

I don't think the right has any idea how to fix healthcare than the left, so I don't want you to think they know what to do. I'd rather the government just stay the freak out of our affairs and not freak excrement up further
Tldr
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 18, 2016, 06:51:08 PM
Tldr

The tl;dr for every dcm post is always the same:

(http://imgur.com/0y7do.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 18, 2016, 06:52:30 PM
If Trump and Clinton are the "best"  politicians that Republicans and Democrats can come up with how the freak you think they're gonna do any better fixing healthcare?

Our government is flat out freaking incompetent and that's a fact. Is our current system good, no its freaking not. But having a ton of corrupt politicians  "fix"  it won't make it better.

How many states pension plans are on the cusp of going bankrupt? There's been all kinds of discussions about buyouts and excrement for teachers because the government can't pay for it. Social security isn't solvency and is also fucked. Our country's debt is completely out of control and there's no feasible solution to paying it off. Government programs to encourage poor people buying homes they can't afford almost caused the greatest depression the world has ever seen. We have completely failed to combat global warming. It literally took them freaking months and months to get the freaking WEBPAGE for Obamacare to work.

Our government is absolutely positively incompetent and terrible at everything they do. If you genuinely think they are capable of fixing healthcare you're seriously freaking stupid. That's not to say that there aren't things they can do to point us in the right direction, but to put them in charge of healthcare for everybody is a diasaster.

I don't think the right has any idea how to fix healthcare than the left, so I don't want you to think they know what to do. I'd rather the government just stay the freak out of our affairs and not freak excrement up further
I'm quoting this for no reason.  I didn't read it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on August 18, 2016, 06:55:05 PM
DCM right now getting notifications: "Oh sweet, people are quoting my post...

Oh god damnit"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 18, 2016, 07:04:52 PM
I don't have Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on August 18, 2016, 07:05:53 PM
I don't have Tapatalk
freak you
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 18, 2016, 07:10:09 PM
I don't have Tapatalk
I didn't read this either
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 18, 2016, 07:16:20 PM
If Trump and Clinton are the "best"  politicians that Republicans and Democrats can come up with how the freak you think they're gonna do any better fixing healthcare?

Our government is flat out freaking incompetent and that's a fact. Is our current system good, no its freaking not. But having a ton of corrupt politicians  "fix"  it won't make it better.

How many states pension plans are on the cusp of going bankrupt? There's been all kinds of discussions about buyouts and excrement for teachers because the government can't pay for it. Social security isn't solvency and is also fucked. Our country's debt is completely out of control and there's no feasible solution to paying it off. Government programs to encourage poor people buying homes they can't afford almost caused the greatest depression the world has ever seen. We have completely failed to combat global warming. It literally took them freaking months and months to get the freaking WEBPAGE for Obamacare to work.

Our government is absolutely positively incompetent and terrible at everything they do. If you genuinely think they are capable of fixing healthcare you're seriously freaking stupid. That's not to say that there aren't things they can do to point us in the right direction, but to put them in charge of healthcare for everybody is a diasaster.

I don't think the right has any idea how to fix healthcare than the left, so I don't want you to think they know what to do. I'd rather the government just stay the freak out of our affairs and not freak excrement up further

POTW
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 19, 2016, 12:03:29 AM
If Trump and Clinton are the "best"  politicians that Republicans and Democrats can come up with how the freak you think they're gonna do any better fixing healthcare?

Our government is flat out freaking incompetent and that's a fact. Is our current system good, no its freaking not. But having a ton of corrupt politicians  "fix"  it won't make it better.

How many states pension plans are on the cusp of going bankrupt? There's been all kinds of discussions about buyouts and excrement for teachers because the government can't pay for it. Social security isn't solvency and is also fucked. Our country's debt is completely out of control and there's no feasible solution to paying it off. Government programs to encourage poor people buying homes they can't afford almost caused the greatest depression the world has ever seen. We have completely failed to combat global warming. It literally took them freaking months and months to get the freaking WEBPAGE for Obamacare to work.

Our government is absolutely positively incompetent and terrible at everything they do. If you genuinely think they are capable of fixing healthcare you're seriously freaking stupid. That's not to say that there aren't things they can do to point us in the right direction, but to put them in charge of healthcare for everybody is a diasaster.

I don't think the right has any idea how to fix healthcare than the left, so I don't want you to think they know what to do. I'd rather the government just stay the freak out of our affairs and not freak excrement up further

This is the best post of yours I have not read DCM, keep up the good work!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 19, 2016, 10:44:58 AM
So the $400 million to Iran was leverage but not ransom?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/money-paid-to-iran-was-leverage-not-ransom-state-department-says/2016/08/18/4c1040b7-8ea0-40bd-b7cd-8629dc16c036_story.html?tid=sm_fb
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 19, 2016, 10:50:38 AM

So the $400 million to Iran was leverage but not ransom?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/money-paid-to-iran-was-leverage-not-ransom-state-department-says/2016/08/18/4c1040b7-8ea0-40bd-b7cd-8629dc16c036_story.html?tid=sm_fb

Yeah, as I now understand it was a payment that we make anyway, but we intentionally delayed it until our guys were freed. I don't have a problem with that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 19, 2016, 11:05:43 AM
Yeah, as I now understand it was a payment that we make anyway, but we intentionally delayed it until our guys were freed. I don't have a problem with that.

I don't either.  I think it's just semantics that will be twisted to pieces politically.  Iran sure seems to be taking advantage of calling it a ransom.  There was probably a better way to have handled this in the press, but I wouldn't have any clue how.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 19, 2016, 06:02:17 PM
I don't either.  I think it's just semantics that will be twisted to pieces politically.  Iran sure seems to be taking advantage of calling it a ransom.  There was probably a better way to have handled this in the press, but I wouldn't have any clue how.

Obama not looking like a care bear hoo-ha probably would have been a good place to start.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 20, 2016, 04:33:05 PM
To be fair, Aetna is freaking horrible.

Source: my life
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160820/3446089005cbb6ba3ea9f5bff9c9304a.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 20, 2016, 05:07:27 PM
(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160820/3446089005cbb6ba3ea9f5bff9c9304a.jpg)

"Regardless of the fact that a trained professional felt it necessary and appropriate to deliver this medical care as a result of their personal and direct engagement with the patient, our underwriter sitting in an office several states away has taken five minutes to consider the claim and determine that this was an incorrect decision and therefore we will not be paying for it."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 20, 2016, 07:09:17 PM
"Regardless of the fact that a trained professional felt it necessary and appropriate to deliver this medical care as a result of their personal and direct engagement with the patient, our underwriter sitting in an office several states away has taken five minutes to consider the claim and determine that this was an incorrect decision and therefore we will not be paying for it."

Exactly. Our doctor told us to go to the hospital. The doctor at the hospital decided to admit us. Was I supposed to freaking argue with them?

"I know my pregnant wife is in incredible pain but it's probably nothing, we're gonna head home now."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on August 20, 2016, 07:16:27 PM
Wow that is fucked up. We luckily didn't have the insurance company do anything like that to us when we had some issues during pregnancy. The fact that some poopchute can overrule a Dr's decision after the fact is disgraceful.

But hey at least you didn't have to deal with the incompetent government!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 20, 2016, 07:30:07 PM
Exactly. Our doctor told us to go to the hospital. The doctor at the hospital decided to admit us. Was I supposed to freaking argue with them?

"I know my pregnant wife is in incredible pain but it's probably nothing, we're gonna head home now."
Is there an appeals process?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 20, 2016, 08:46:46 PM
Is there an appeals process?

Yeah, this was them denying the appeal. Seems like there's another level we can take it to.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 20, 2016, 08:47:47 PM
Is there an appeals process?

That was an appeal I think

Our system is absolutely fucked up..

But having a government option  doesn't mean he wouldn't have the issue. The government would have to do the exact same excrement to contain costs. The system absolutely needs  to be better and much more transparent. Instead it's a confusing cluster freak and diasaster. If you think any of that would go away with the government running the show you're not very bright.

The only thing that would change (as far as insurance)  is less people would be without coverage.

I'm not gonna speculate on its impact on healthcare itself
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 20, 2016, 08:58:14 PM
But having a government option  doesn't mean he wouldn't have the issue. The government would have to do the exact same excrement to contain costs.

That's not true.

Source: lifelong beneficiary of sweet government healthcare.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 20, 2016, 09:07:28 PM
As someone with firsthand knowledge and experience in the administration of federal entitlement programs, they don't look for excuses not to pay benefits in order to save money, because it's not profit-driven.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 20, 2016, 09:16:02 PM
As someone with firsthand knowledge and experience in the administration of federal entitlement programs, they don't look for excuses not to pay benefits in order to save money, because it's not profit-driven.

So you're saying the government doesn't operate within the confines of a budget?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 21, 2016, 01:10:55 PM

So you're saying the government doesn't operate within the confines of a budget?

I've sold to government institutions before. Their budget is set beforehand based on their current needs and a little extra for future needs (in my case it was research and info etc). They'll almost always choose the cheapest option so they have to have multiple provides submit quotes. On the other hand if they don't spend everything in their budget, it gets cut, so usually they're incentivized to spend every penny. I've had the dept of agriculture give me a number and say "what can we get for this?" It's funny actually but leads to waste.

Getting additional funds approved is a pain in the derriere. At least with private companies if you show them a reasonable ROI they'll appropriate it into their budget for the next year. With governments it's a beaurocratic nightmare.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 21, 2016, 01:15:35 PM
I'm all for basic healthcare being run by the government but we'd have to essentially get rid of obamacare, Medicare, and Medicaid, and essentially start over. And you can't force every practitioner to accept government health care, but the local GPs and specialized ones could. Basically it should be the cheapest option. Medication. aside from controlled substances, should also be included. Maybe limit it to the generic brands.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on August 21, 2016, 04:48:39 PM
I'm all for basic healthcare being run by the government but we'd have to essentially get rid of obamacare, Medicare, and Medicaid, and essentially start over. And you can't force every practitioner to accept government health care, but the local GPs and specialized ones could. Basically it should be the cheapest option. Medication. aside from controlled substances, should also be included. Maybe limit it to the generic brands.

I mostly agree with this.  We are going to have a single payer system in the not too distant future.  It's the only logical solution and is inevitable.  Everyone in DC just needs to put partisan bullshit aside and start working on the long term solution.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 21, 2016, 05:01:05 PM

I mostly agree with this.  We are going to have a single payer system in the not too distant future.  It's the only logical solution and is inevitable.  Everyone in DC just needs to put partisan bullshit aside and start working on the long term solution.

Exactly. We need to build from the ground up. Redo everything. Unfortunately that's not going to happen. We can do it without even raising taxes, but no one wants to talk about it. Single payer has become synonymous with "more taxes!" which is why most conservatives have been against it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on August 21, 2016, 05:05:41 PM
Exactly. We need to build from the ground up. Redo everything. Unfortunately that's not going to happen. We can do it without even raising taxes, but no one wants to talk about it. Single payer has become synonymous with "more taxes!" which is why most conservatives have been against it.

I could be totally wrong about this but my impression from people I actually talk to is that they truly hate the idea of anyone getting the same treatment as them that hasn't esrned it based on whatever metric they think is most important.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on August 21, 2016, 05:06:53 PM
Exactly. We need to build from the ground up. Redo everything. Unfortunately that's not going to happen. We can do it without even raising taxes, but no one wants to talk about it. Single payer has become synonymous with "more taxes!" which is why most conservatives have been against it.

The fact that someone like you and someone like me agree on this tells me otherwise.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on August 21, 2016, 05:08:09 PM
I could be totally wrong about this but my impression from people I actually talk to is that they truly hate the idea of anyone getting the same treatment as them that hasn't esrned it based on whatever metric they think is most important.

There will always be private practices to cater to douche bags like this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 21, 2016, 05:13:24 PM

I could be totally wrong about this but my impression from people I actually talk to is that they truly hate the idea of anyone getting the same treatment as them that hasn't esrned it based on whatever metric they think is most important.

Well, there should still be levels of treatment. I don't agree that everyone deserves the same level of treatment, only that the bare minimum should be guaranteed. If I work my butt off and pay $400 a month for premium insurance then it should be premium. But if I want to just use the public option I could just opt out. There still needs to be an incentive to pay for premium care.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 21, 2016, 05:44:38 PM
Well, there should still be levels of treatment. I don't agree that everyone deserves the same level of treatment, only that the bare minimum should be guaranteed. If I work my butt off and pay $400 a month for premium insurance then it should be premium. But if I want to just use the public option I could just opt out. There still needs to be an incentive to pay for premium care.

AKA the British system, or close to.

Health insurance should be optional. Healthcare should be available to everybody. I don't understand why so many people can't see that the cost of their healthcare would reduce significantly if it was free at the point of delivery with a government run single payer system. There are two reasons for this - no insurance comnpany taking profits from the administration of a basic human right, and people taking advantage of preventative healthcare and thus avoiding the really expensive, and far less expedient, reactive procedures.

There's nothing wrong with allowing people to also take private insurance and access private care, but that shouldn't be an alternative to them paying into the public system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 21, 2016, 06:38:54 PM
AKA the British system, or close to.

Health insurance should be optional. Healthcare should be available to everybody. I don't understand why so many people can't see that the cost of their healthcare would reduce significantly if it was free at the point of delivery with a government run single payer system. There are two reasons for this - no insurance comnpany taking profits from the administration of a basic human right, and people taking advantage of preventative healthcare and thus avoiding the really expensive, and far less expedient, reactive procedures.

There's nothing wrong with allowing people to also take private insurance and access private care, but that shouldn't be an alternative to them paying into the public system.

Well healthcare is "available" to everybody

And a big issue with government run healthcare is going to be getting healthcare providers. Theres already a shortage of providers in this country, when you start getting the government low-balling everybody you're going to have even more shortages, pull great minds out of the field, and hamper R&D.

How badly and significantly these things will happen nobody has a freaking clue. But if anyone pretends that there wont be significant negatives (along with positives) is a freaking moron.

Im not pretending to know the answer at all as i dont know excrement, other than its not as simple as people like to pretend

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on August 21, 2016, 06:59:48 PM
Well healthcare is "available" to everybody

And a big issue with government run healthcare is going to be getting healthcare providers. Theres already a shortage of providers in this country, when you start getting the government low-balling everybody you're going to have even more shortages, pull great minds out of the field, and hamper R&D.

How badly and significantly these things will happen nobody has a freaking clue. But if anyone pretends that there wont be significant negatives (along with positives) is a freaking moron.

Im not pretending to know the answer at all as i dont know excrement, other than its not as simple as people like to pretend
Clearly not biased
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 21, 2016, 07:11:27 PM
Clearly not biased

I was really referring more to doctors anesthesiologist and excrement like that. Having to go to school and take out loans for 8-12 years to get paid dick really isn't worth it. Same thing with PAs and stuff like that as well.

You're easily talking 200k+ in student loans, and that's on the low end of the spectrum. Plus not having a full time job until your mid to early 30s

Government getting involved makes all that stuff less attractive. Especially because not only will these people be making less, they're going to be getting taxed substantially more. Plus these people will be expected to see way more patients in way less time. These careers will certainly be less attractive

As far as the other parts of healthcare all its really going to do is make ratios work, and pass off the work of registered professionals to aids and techs and stuff.

No question asked a government run system cuts costs, but what it will do to quality and access to care (waiting time)  is a whole different story.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on August 21, 2016, 07:24:36 PM
I was really referring more to doctors anesthesiologist and excrement like that. Having to go to school and take out loans for 8-12 years to get paid dick really isn't worth it. Same thing with PAs and stuff like that as well.

You're easily talking 200k+ in student loans, and that's on the low end of the spectrum. Plus not having a full time job until your mid to early 30s

Government getting involved makes all that stuff less attractive.

As far as the other parts of healthcare all its really going to do is make ratios work, and pass off the work of registered professionals to aids and techs and stuff.

No question asked a government run system cuts costs, but what it will do to quality and access to care (waiting time)  is a whole different story.



This is incorrect on so many levels.  No, doctors do not make 'dick' in a single payer system.  And no, they do not have trouble paying off their student loans and eventually making a fortune.

There is not a shortage of doctors or doctors in training in single payer countries.  There just isn't.  When the US goes single payer, it will level the playing field even more globally.

A major benefit would be doctors becoming doctors to help people, not simply to become millionaires.

Eliminating profiteering insurance companies from the equation, and regulating drug companies (like they are in all 1st world countries) would pay for the system itself.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 21, 2016, 07:29:12 PM
Average doctor's salary in Canada - $225K

Average doctor's salary in the US - $210K
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 21, 2016, 07:30:14 PM
According to the NYT yall wrong

http://economix.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/07/15/how-much-do-doctors-in-other-countries-make/?_r=0

It's a few years old but I doubt things change drastically

And this is the first thing to come up on Google but I have no idea how reliable the site is

http://oureverydaylife.com/effects-socialized-medicine-doctors-salaries-35046.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 21, 2016, 07:35:48 PM
Quote
Practically, that means Canadian doctors have an average annual income (before taxes) of a little more than $225,000.

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/how-much-are-canadian-doctors-paid/article7750697/

With the amount of specialisation and the difference by province it's obviously a pretty rounded number, but your assertion that publicly administered single payer systems mean that a) doctors get paid less and b) fewer people want to become doctors is horseshit. Do you think 18 year olds with a hankering to read medicine say "freak that, I'm not doing it if I only get $150K a year"?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 21, 2016, 07:43:06 PM
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/health-and-fitness/health/how-much-are-canadian-doctors-paid/article7750697/

With the amount of specialisation and the difference by province it's obviously a pretty rounded number, but your assertion that publicly administered single payer systems mean that a) doctors get paid less and b) fewer people want to become doctors is horseshit. Do you think 18 year olds with a hankering to read medicine say "freak that, I'm not doing it if I only get $150K a year"?

I read that article too and it's got flaws all over. For starters it only factors in gross pay, which doesn't include their office employees and etc. And later pulls a number out as a self reported guess of how much that costs.

Second 18 year olds aren't going to medschool. Typically people that go to medschool have lived in the real world and graduated undergrad.

8-10 years of medical school and residency 300k in student loans worth 150k with ridiculous tax rates is a very different story.

And countries all over the world are already having a shortage of specialist. As people are living longer and baby boomers aging were already looking at scarcity of healthcare providers. A socialized system could make it worse.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 21, 2016, 07:56:55 PM
I realize that any of us getting involved in this argument makes us stubborn asses, as nobody is going to change anybodys opinion.

The point I was attempting to make was any change would have significant negative consequences (and yes significant positive ones as well)

I think this outlines the pros and cons in a much more organized fashion presumably backed by facts

http://apecsec.org/socialized-medicine-pros-and-cons/

I think any reasonable person would be able to see that there are good and bad things about it. Anyone who thinks Omg how can anybody not like socialized healthcare it's the greatest is as stubborn and ignorant as any Trump supporter. Even I will concede that there would be numerous benefits to socialized medicine, economies of scale would allow for substantial cost savings.

I just tend to think that socialized medicine also negatively impacts a decent percentage of the population as well
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 21, 2016, 08:33:16 PM
There are some reasonable arguments in that article but there are also some spurious ones. The median household income in Canada is $76K per annum; median household healthcare expenditure via tax is $11K, which is a far cry from the 25% claimed. Social healthcare is far from the only difference between the US and most of the rest of the OECD, so it's pretty unreasonable to claim that healthcare is the sole difference.

It also makes an illogical argument about wait times; it's a well established phenomenon that significant amounts of people in the US will avoid going to see a doctor about a medical issue because they're scared of the cost. Claiming that making healthcare too expensive for people to use reduces wait times to see a doctor is technically correct but entirely misses the point of what it's trying to argue.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 22, 2016, 05:30:14 AM
I'm all for basic healthcare being run by the government but we'd have to essentially get rid of obamacare, Medicare, and Medicaid, and essentially start over. And you can't force every practitioner to accept government health care, but the local GPs and specialized ones could. Basically it should be the cheapest option. Medication. aside from controlled substances, should also be included. Maybe limit it to the generic brands.
That's part of why I was against the ACA. It didn't feel like a move toward a better system (and I wasn't necessarily in favor of single payer at the time). It felt like tacking a bunch of excrement on to an already deeply flawed system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on August 22, 2016, 07:50:14 AM
Student loan reform seems like a good idea all of a sudden... But then you will rant about the people who didn't get a useful enough degree for your liking.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 22, 2016, 10:19:44 AM
Student loan reform seems like a good idea all of a sudden... But then you will rant about the people who didn't get a useful enough degree for your liking.

If anyone can't pay for their degree, supply and demand suggests it wasn't very useful. Or they should have chosen a more  affordable school.

Personally i think a better solution would be to promote more state schools. If people opt to go to an expensive private school that's their decision.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 22, 2016, 10:21:55 AM
If anyone can't pay for their degree, it wasn't very useful.

That statement assumes that the only value of getting a degree, to both the student and society as a whole, is to enable someone to earn as much money as possible.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 22, 2016, 10:25:09 AM
That statement assumes that the only value of getting a degree, to both the student and society as a whole, is to enable someone to earn as much money as possible.

It suggests that college is an investment, and investments should generate a return on that initial investment.

The fact is there are a LOT of shitty degrees out there. And there's a tremendous amount of personal choice in colleges. If you chose to get a excrement degree from an overpriced college why should somebody else be forced to pay for that?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 22, 2016, 10:26:27 AM
It suggests that college is an investment, and investments should generate a return on that initial investment.

The fact is there are a LOT of shitty degrees out there. And there's a tremendous amount of personal choice in colleges. If you chose to get a excrement degree from an overpriced college why should somebody else be forced to pay for that?

Because many people do degrees in subject for which they have a talent and a passion, from which society can gain significant benefit, but for which there isn't a huge salary to be realised.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 22, 2016, 10:27:17 AM
And it doesn't just assume that the point of a degree is to make as much money as possible.

Society deems a doctor is far more valuable than say a art major. Which is why doctors get paid more than artist or whatever.

This is significantly oversimplified absolutely, but society shouldn't have to fund somebody's excrement decision
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 22, 2016, 10:29:43 AM
Because many people do degrees in subject for which they have a talent and a passion, from which society can gain significant benefit, but for which there isn't a huge salary to be realised.

Somebody's talent and passion doesn't mean anybody should have to fund it.

And if it was a "significant benefit"  to society, then they would get paid more.

And if that's what you say is truly the case, then these people should be more economical and go to inexpensive state schools that are more affordable.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 22, 2016, 10:30:49 AM
Somebody's talent and passion doesn't mean anybody should have to fund it.

And if it was a "significant benefit"  to society, then they would get paid more.

And if that's what you say is truly the case, then these people should be more economical and go to inexpensive state schools that are more affordable.


None of that is true, but your world view is so incredibly narrow and lacking in experience of the real world that this is probably a somewhat pointless discussion.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 22, 2016, 10:38:12 AM
None of that is true, but your world view is so incredibly narrow and lacking in experience of the real world that this is probably a somewhat pointless discussion.

None of that's true? So people should have to fund others talent and passion?

And going to state schools to be more economical for low paying degrees isn't a good idea?

You just brush everything off with "none of that is true"  nonsense.

If you want to make the argument that the pay thing is wrong, you can make a solid argument about that. And I can just as easily make the argument with basic economic concepts against it.

Regardless I'm not sure why people shouldn't be allowed to make their own decisions and bare responsibility for them.

I have no objections whatsoever in expanding state schools to make more affordable options and to keep private schools pricing competitive. But to say people should be able to make excrement financial decisions and have everybody else bail them out is stupid hippie garbage.

I'll also point out thst this countries deficit is fucked as excrement, and these ideas just substantially add to it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 22, 2016, 10:54:23 AM
I actually agree with dcm. Not all degrees are useful in terms of "bettering society" and some we would never see even a slight financial return on what we paid into. Just curious, free education would extend to vocational and technical schools, too, right?


The real problem is that the price of a college education is ludicrous. maybe more people could afford degrees if universities weren't allowed to charge exorbitant prices?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 22, 2016, 10:57:45 AM

Student loan reform seems like a good idea all of a sudden... But then you will rant about the people who didn't get a useful enough degree for your liking.

What would you propose in terms of student loan reform?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 22, 2016, 11:02:05 AM
If you want to make an argument for controlling the cost of education such that it's sensibly accessible to all then you'll not get any resistance from me. DCM's original point was that if someone is saddled with student loans that they can't afford to pay back then their degree wasn't worthwhile, meaning that markets set the value of education which I think is ridiculous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 22, 2016, 11:02:59 AM
A buddy of mine and his wife had to pay close to $1,000 a month for his dumb wife's (now ex) stupid student loans for her drama degree at some expensive college in CT. She's now an account manager at some PR firm making dick. But she does some improv in her spare time!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 22, 2016, 11:03:38 AM
I actually agree with dcm. Not all degrees are useful in terms of "bettering society" and some we would never see even a slight financial return on what we paid into. Just curious, free education would extend to vocational and technical schools, too, right?


The real problem is that the price of a college education is ludicrous. maybe more people could afford degrees if universities weren't allowed to charge exorbitant prices?

More state schools is an easy fix.

They're cheaper bringing down prices, and it keeps private schools honest and forces them to be more competitive. Whether that's pricing or offering a superior education.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on August 22, 2016, 01:29:14 PM
I think it'd be worthwhile to institute a community college type two-year bridge school that is state/federally funded. It would teach high school graduates the core courses they need for most programs at which point they can choose to pursue a specific field at a university.

If there are students that graduate high school and are dead-set on studying law, engineering, medicine, etc they still have the option to do so but a general continuing education program would benefit those with no career-path that are pushed to go to college just because they are supposed to.

I just think it's stupid to have 17/18 year olds pick their degree and field of work for the rest of their lives at such a young age.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 22, 2016, 02:33:06 PM
I think it'd be worthwhile to institute a community college type two-year bridge school that is state/federally funded. It would teach high school graduates the core courses they need for most programs at which point they can choose to pursue a specific field at a university.

If there are students that graduate high school and are dead-set on studying law, engineering, medicine, etc they still have the option to do so but a general continuing education program would benefit those with no career-path that are pushed to go to college just because they are supposed to.

I just think it's stupid to have 17/18 year olds pick their degree and field of work for the rest of their lives at such a young age.

My older kids both go to Boston University. BU's curriculum demands that unless you go in specifically pre-med or engineering (and a couple of others), you enter as a student of the College of General Studies. For the first 2 years you don't declare a major or take the coursework--you focus on a well-rounded education that exposes you to a broad base of disciplines while you figure out what you want to do with your life.

My understanding is that it's becoming a standard in a lot of places today. It only makes sense. Like you said, a 17-18 year old doesn't generally know what they want to do with their lives.

I have a specific problem with student loans. It's not that they should be forgiven--they should be interest free. I understand banks wouldn't want to take the risk (and would have no incentive to) so let the federal government give out interest-free loans. And the student shouldn't need to begin payments until 6 years after the loan amount was taken (so 2 years after graduation to begin paying back freshman year). The idea that interest is accruing before a student even takes his first class is ridiculous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on August 22, 2016, 02:51:23 PM
My older kids both go to Boston University. BU's curriculum demands that unless you go in specifically pre-med or engineering (and a couple of others), you enter as a student of the College of General Studies. For the first 2 years you don't declare a major or take the coursework--you focus on a well-rounded education that exposes you to a broad base of disciplines while you figure out what you want to do with your life.

My understanding is that it's becoming a standard in a lot of places today. It only makes sense. Like you said, a 17-18 year old doesn't generally know what they want to do with their lives.

I have a specific problem with student loans. It's not that they should be forgiven--they should be interest free. I understand banks wouldn't want to take the risk (and would have no incentive to) so let the federal government give out interest-free loans. And the student shouldn't need to begin payments until 6 years after the loan amount was taken (so 2 years after graduation to begin paying back freshman year). The idea that interest is accruing before a student even takes his first class is ridiculous.

AlioTheFossil
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 22, 2016, 03:03:56 PM
AlioTheFossil

Hahahaha, I like that.

I'm only 41 though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on August 22, 2016, 03:05:29 PM
Hahahaha, I like that.

I'm only 41 though.

I always thought you were in that age range, but the kids in college thing threw me off so I added an extra 10 years mentally.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on August 22, 2016, 03:05:56 PM
Hahahaha, I like that.

I'm only 41 though.

Now i feel old.


EDIT: I thought you were in your 50s also...with kids being in University.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on August 22, 2016, 03:10:07 PM
What would you propose in terms of student loan reform?

To immediately shut DCM up about no drs I would say do what they do with some other degrees. Get your med degree and then go work in a place identified to have a big need for whatever amount of time, 5-10 years, and then the loans are forgiven. Do that with a bunch more degrees that society needs too.

Or just become a civilized country and realize we already eat the cost of the people who insist on a degree that they can't repay their loans with. Everyone can point to whatever person they know was nieve and just wanted to study whatever excrement they found interesting and thought they could figure out the job situation after the fact. Hell, I'm one of them but I have managed to have a decent "useful" job since I graduated.

We aren't really talking usefulness here anyway we are talking high wages. From the past 6 months of your posts you have pretty much told us you lie to other companies to sell some crappy business software. That doesn't fit my definition of useful to society but you get paid an assload for it anyway.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 22, 2016, 03:19:27 PM
I always thought you were in that age range, but the kids in college thing threw me off so I added an extra 10 years mentally.
Now i feel old.

EDIT: I thought you were in your 50s also...with kids being in University.

Yeah, I started early. My wife was 18 when she had my oldest. I was a month and a half shy of 23 the day we got married. We'll be really young grandparents.

To immediately shut DCM up about no drs I would say do what they do with some other degrees. Get your med degree and then go work in a place identified to have a big need for whatever amount of time, 5-10 years, and then the loans are forgiven. Do that with a bunch more degrees that society needs too.

Or just become a civilized country and realize we already eat the cost of the people who insist on a degree that they can't repay their loans with.

I'm not a big fan of loan forgiveness, but forgiveness in exchange for service would be okay to me. You'd still be paying it back, just not with the exchange of currency.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 22, 2016, 03:23:13 PM
My older kids both go to Boston University. BU's curriculum demands that unless you go in specifically pre-med or engineering (and a couple of others), you enter as a student of the College of General Studies. For the first 2 years you don't declare a major or take the coursework--you focus on a well-rounded education that exposes you to a broad base of disciplines while you figure out what you want to do with your life.

My understanding is that it's becoming a standard in a lot of places today. It only makes sense. Like you said, a 17-18 year old doesn't generally know what they want to do with their lives.

I have a specific problem with student loans. It's not that they should be forgiven--they should be interest free. I understand banks wouldn't want to take the risk (and would have no incentive to) so let the federal government give out interest-free loans. And the student shouldn't need to begin payments until 6 years after the loan amount was taken (so 2 years after graduation to begin paying back freshman year). The idea that interest is accruing before a student even takes his first class is ridiculous.

I can agree with your concept, but not the execution.

I'm perfectly ok with removing the profiteering from student loans. I'd prefer the government to get involved with as little as possible, but I understand that student loans are indeed a financial problem.

As long as it was done in a deficit neutral manner I could get on board.  Interest free loans we would lose money on. You have to factor in inflation  (which means were losing money off the bat)  plus the fact that we would likely need to borrow money from other countries (thus paying interest) (or under the unlikely scenario we ever have a surplus we would generate a return on that money one way or another) you would also need to factor in people going delinquent on their loans or declaring bankruptcy and what not.

As long as this was all taken into taken into consideration and factored in to make it deficit neutral I'd be 100% on board. This means you couldn't have 0% interest but the number would be much smaller than they're paying now (as nobody is profiting off of it).  How long people paid it off over and when the payments kicked in is irrelevant to me,  as it would be deficit neutral. So if someone didn't want to start payments until 6 years after they graduate, they'd be paying substantially higher interest rates.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 22, 2016, 03:27:13 PM
Forgiveness for service works too.

I've mentioned in another thread about how the army has a famous anesthesia program. They pay for the entire schooling, and in return you need to do anesthesia for them for a significantly discounted rate.

Something like that is fair, and presumably cost neutral. Not to mention  it encourages people to do something that benefits society.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on August 22, 2016, 10:28:35 PM
My older kids both go to Boston University. BU's curriculum demands that unless you go in specifically pre-med or engineering (and a couple of others), you enter as a student of the College of General Studies. For the first 2 years you don't declare a major or take the coursework--you focus on a well-rounded education that exposes you to a broad base of disciplines while you figure out what you want to do with your life.

My understanding is that it's becoming a standard in a lot of places today. It only makes sense. Like you said, a 17-18 year old doesn't generally know what they want to do with their lives.

I have a specific problem with student loans. It's not that they should be forgiven--they should be interest free. I understand banks wouldn't want to take the risk (and would have no incentive to) so let the federal government give out interest-free loans. And the student shouldn't need to begin payments until 6 years after the loan amount was taken (so 2 years after graduation to begin paying back freshman year). The idea that interest is accruing before a student even takes his first class is ridiculous.

Although what pope is saying is a good idea the excrement BU and other schools are pulling is crap.  They arent stopping you from declaring a major so you can explore what you want to do they are stopping you so they can get more of your money.

Yes kids should stop hopping on the college train so early to figure out what they actually want to do in life, but they shouldnt be required to take biology, physics, and calculus if you want to be a creative director for an advertising agency.  Its a shame and a waste of thousands of dollars.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 23, 2016, 09:37:27 AM
Although what pope is saying is a good idea the excrement BU and other schools are pulling is crap.  They arent stopping you from declaring a major so you can explore what you want to do they are stopping you so they can get more of your money.

Yes kids should stop hopping on the college train so early to figure out what they actually want to do in life, but they shouldnt be required to take biology, physics, and calculus if you want to be a creative director for an advertising agency.  Its a shame and a waste of thousands of dollars.

If you already know what you want to do, the option is there to apply to the program you'd like (ex. the School of Engineering). The College of General Studies is simply a place for students to take all of the required "liberal arts" courses while learning about different fields of dedicated study until they determine their chosen major, rather than at the same time.

If your argument is that students shouldn't take a breadth of courses outside of their major, and should instead take only courses directly related to their major, then we're in direct disagreement. Broad studies are important for the brain; that's been established through centuries of science. Students exposed to broad studies become better thinkers/problem solvers.

I took a specialized program in college and even I had to take 3 semesters of math, accounting, writing, history, etc. I've long regretted not putting in more effort in my accounting coursework. You don't realize how important your non-major work is until you actually need it.


EDIT: Also, just because you want to be the creative director of an ad agency doesn't mean you will be. It would be a lot more disingenuous for a school to prepare you for a pigeonholed position and leave you completely unprepared to do anything else when it doesn't work out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 23, 2016, 10:01:45 AM
EDIT: Also, just because you want to be the creative director of an ad agency doesn't mean you will be. It would be a lot more disingenuous for a school to prepare you for a pigeonholed position and leave you completely unprepared to do anything else when it doesn't work out.

No no no, this is the 21st century and YOU CAN BE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO BE IF YOU JUST WANT IT ENOUGH AND WORK HARD ENOUGH TO GET IT.

One of the most damaging pieces of propaganda peddled in years, IMO. There's nothing wrong with pursuing your dreams, but you can't do so to the exclusion of reality. I could have spent my entire existence since birth wanting to be an NBA power forward but no amount of wanting and working would make me a foot taller.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 23, 2016, 10:16:54 AM
No no no, this is the 21st century and YOU CAN BE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO BE IF YOU JUST WANT IT ENOUGH AND WORK HARD ENOUGH TO GET IT.

One of the most damaging pieces of propaganda peddled in years, IMO. There's nothing wrong with pursuing your dreams, but you can't do so to the exclusion of reality. I could have spent my entire existence since birth wanting to be an NBA power forward but no amount of wanting and working would make me a foot taller.

While your example is hyperbole, I completely agree with the sentiment.

When I went back to college to pursue my dream of programming for a living my intention was to build video games. Yet I'm about to have my 14th anniversary as a database admin at a real estate corporation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 23, 2016, 10:35:57 AM
I think the problem with taking general courses is a lot of them are excrement nonsense that nobody gives a freak about.

I agree there's some benefit in being well rounded, but when nobody takes it seriously or cares it's just a waste of time and money
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 23, 2016, 12:06:29 PM
I think the problem with taking general courses is a lot of them are excrement nonsense that nobody gives a freak about.

I agree there's some benefit in being well rounded, but when nobody takes it seriously or cares it's just a waste of time and money

The problem there lies with the student, not the coursework.

As I said, I really wish I'd have spent more effort in my accounting classes. I laughed right in my professor's face when he said someday I'd need what he was trying to teach. It turns out I need it quite often at work.

Beyond that, studies have shown that the sheer exposure to other disciplines makes you a better problem solver. Whether you realize it or not, you're being prepared to look at problems from different angles than you would with a more narrow educational view.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 23, 2016, 12:09:12 PM
prepared to look at problems from different angles than you would with a more narrow educational view.

You do realise who you're talking to here, right?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 23, 2016, 12:30:17 PM
No no no, this is the 21st century and YOU CAN BE ANYTHING YOU WANT TO BE IF YOU JUST WANT IT ENOUGH AND WORK HARD ENOUGH TO GET IT.

One of the most damaging pieces of propaganda peddled in years, IMO. There's nothing wrong with pursuing your dreams, but you can't do so to the exclusion of reality. I could have spent my entire existence since birth wanting to be an NBA power forward but no amount of wanting and working would make me a foot taller.
But even at 6'2" you'd be pretty small for a forward.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 23, 2016, 02:07:38 PM
Hahahahahah
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 23, 2016, 02:36:05 PM
You do realise who you're talking to here, right?

All the time and money I spent on college I think I know a thing or two about being educated from all different angles and views
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 23, 2016, 02:54:14 PM
But even at 6'2" you'd be pretty small for a forward.

Hahaha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 23, 2016, 02:54:23 PM
All the time and money I spent on college I think I know a thing or two about being educated from all different angles and views

I think you know a thing or two about getting railed from all different angles and views.  Not so sure about the educated part.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 23, 2016, 02:57:17 PM
I think you know a thing or two about getting railed from all different angles and views.  Not so sure about the educated part.

Let's keep what you me and Heismanberg do on the weekend private.

Thanks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 23, 2016, 03:21:23 PM
Let's keep what you me and Heismanberg do on the weekend private.

Thanks

God you're desperate
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 23, 2016, 04:39:12 PM
All the time and money I spent on college I think I know a thing or two about being educated from all different angles and views

And there's the nub of your problem. You only ever views things through the narrow filter of your own experience, you seem incapable of stepping outside your own tiny sphere of experience and considering that someone else's experiences could be both very different to yours, and equally valid. At least Tommy has the honesty, if also the monstrous hubris, to admit that his positions start and end with what's good for him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on August 23, 2016, 04:48:22 PM
All the time and money I spent on college I think I know a thing or two about being educated from all different angles and views

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

hold on i'm not done

hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


you poor little child


hahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 23, 2016, 05:12:11 PM
And there's the nub of your problem. You only ever views things through the narrow filter of your own experience, you seem incapable of stepping outside your own tiny sphere of experience and considering that someone else's experiences could be both very different to yours, and equally valid. At least Tommy has the honesty, if also the monstrous hubris, to admit that his positions start and end with what's good for him.

We were having a conversation about taking college courses that have nothing to do with anything

My point was I took plenty of those. And a lot of those classes not just the teacher doesn't take them serious either
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 23, 2016, 05:19:12 PM
We were having a conversation about taking college courses that have nothing to do with anything

My point was I took plenty of those. And a lot of those classes not just the teacher doesn't take them serious either

Exactly my point. YOU took a bunch of those courses and they did nothing for YOU and YOUR teachers didn't take them seriously, so on that basis you have decided that those courses are useless for everyone, despite Alio giving you direct anecdotal evidence to the contrary.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 23, 2016, 05:27:53 PM
Exactly my point. YOU took a bunch of those courses and they did nothing for YOU and YOUR teachers didn't take them seriously, so on that basis you have decided that those courses are useless for everyone, despite Alio giving you direct anecdotal evidence to the contrary.

I didn't say that, I actually agreed with him.

And then Alio went on to say that he didn't take his accounting courses seriously, which adds to my point was the problem that many people don't take courses not pertinent to their major ad seriously.

If you don't understand than you probably haven't been in college in a long freaking derriere time.

And I'll point out one more time that I agreed with him that these courses can be beneficial.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 23, 2016, 05:30:38 PM
I didn't say that, I actually agreed with him.

And then Alio went on to say that he didn't take his accounting courses seriously, which adds to my point was the problem that many people don't take courses not pertinent to their major ad seriously.

If you don't understand than you probably haven't been in college in a long freaking derriere time.

And I'll point out one more time that I agreed with him that these courses can be beneficial.



I'm sorry, I must have misconstrued your general support for the idea in this quote:

I think the problem with taking general courses is a lot of them are excrement nonsense that nobody gives a freak about.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 23, 2016, 05:52:45 PM
Which is true.

It doesn't mean you don't gain a benefit from them. People don't take off major courses and specifically electives as seriously
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 23, 2016, 06:13:12 PM
Which is true.

It doesn't mean you don't gain a benefit from them. People don't take off major courses and specifically electives as seriously

But why?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 23, 2016, 06:25:41 PM
But why?

Because electives frequently have nothing  to do with your interest or future. I've had to take all kinda of nonsense over the years. Mummy science, music history (or some excrement) , us history, I can't even remember all the crap I've taken. But it had absolutely nothing to do with my interest (at the time)  or career plans.

It makes perfect sense that a person would pay less attention that something that doesn't interest them,  or that doesn't have a clear benefit to them in some way. I fully agree that it could be beneficial by teaching you other ways to think about it. But I think many people also think they would get a greater benefit from something at least tangently related.

If I wanna go into medicine how about a course on alternative medicine (something different, but related)  instead of a art class.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 23, 2016, 06:27:18 PM
Not to mention when people are paying (usually quite a bit for their college)

You can see why they might be annoyed when the university wants them to pay 2000$ to take an art history class when they want to become say a physicial therapist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 23, 2016, 06:33:39 PM
Because electives frequently have nothing  to do with your interest or future. I've had to take all kinda of nonsense over the years. Mummy science, music history (or some excrement) , us history, I can't even remember all the crap I've taken. But it had absolutely nothing to do with my interest (at the time)  or career plans.

It makes perfect sense that a person would pay less attention that something that doesn't interest them,  or that doesn't have a clear benefit to them in some way. I fully agree that it could be beneficial by teaching you other ways to think about it. But I think many people also think they would get a greater benefit from something at least tangently related.

If I wanna go into medicine how about a course on alternative medicine (something different, but related)  instead of a art class.



Because it goes back to Pope's absolutely correct point that so many kids at 18 or 19 don't have a clue what they want to do, and quite understandably, so it make sense to do a bunch of things - many of which won't necessarily be that interesting or relevant to what they end up doing - in order to find the one or two things that really do flick their switch, and give them a focus and direction. Just because you knew what you wanted to do doesn't mean that others do, and it doesn't make them better off or worse than you. Just different.

And because it goes back to Alio's also absolutely correct point that even if you do end up following your chosen path you don't know what other apparently completely unconnected skills are going to come in useful in later life and in future roles, and just because Alio didn't pay attention in accounting and you didn't care about your electives doesn't mean that you won't need them in the future and regret not paying attention just like Alio, nor does it mean that others didn't pay attention and won't value them at some point in the future.

Education for education's sake is good. We need to stop tying everything that everyone does, especially kids in their late teens and early twenties, into hardline capitalistic values. Education in general makes people smarter, more inquisitive, more interesting and more rounded. It's a thing that as a society we should be encouraging and paying for.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on August 23, 2016, 08:01:11 PM
If you already know what you want to do, the option is there to apply to the program you'd like (ex. the School of Engineering). The College of General Studies is simply a place for students to take all of the required "liberal arts" courses while learning about different fields of dedicated study until they determine their chosen major, rather than at the same time.

If your argument is that students shouldn't take a breadth of courses outside of their major, and should instead take only courses directly related to their major, then we're in direct disagreement. Broad studies are important for the brain; that's been established through centuries of science. Students exposed to broad studies become better thinkers/problem solvers.

I took a specialized program in college and even I had to take 3 semesters of math, accounting, writing, history, etc. I've long regretted not putting in more effort in my accounting coursework. You don't realize how important your non-major work is until you actually need it.


EDIT: Also, just because you want to be the creative director of an ad agency doesn't mean you will be. It would be a lot more disingenuous for a school to prepare you for a pigeonholed position and leave you completely unprepared to do anything else when it doesn't work out.
I agree that learning about a broad range of topics is imporant for personl growth, im paying for a degree ina particular field.  I shouldnt have to pay thousands of dollars for a gym class.  Im perfectly capable of reading up on historical figures or learning about electrical engineering on my own time.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 23, 2016, 08:17:04 PM
To be fair I remember taking a fuckton of courses both inside and outside my curriculum that I found boring and hated but had to do well in for the grade. Doing the bare minimum amount of required work for Bs and Cs
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 23, 2016, 10:09:23 PM
http://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2016-election/bernie-sanders-new-group-hits-major-trouble-launchpad-n636741?cid=sm_fb
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 23, 2016, 11:27:51 PM
I picked computer science because we were at the height of the dotcom bubble, then I realized I hated that excrement and sucked at it, so just picked the easiest courses to graduate. Double major in Econ and East Asian studies yo.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on August 24, 2016, 06:51:56 AM
Because it goes back to Pope's absolutely correct point that so many kids at 18 or 19 don't have a clue what they want to do, and quite understandably, so it make sense to do a bunch of things - many of which won't necessarily be that interesting or relevant to what they end up doing - in order to find the one or two things that really do flick their switch, and give them a focus and direction. Just because you knew what you wanted to do doesn't mean that others do, and it doesn't make them better off or worse than you. Just different.

And because it goes back to Alio's also absolutely correct point that even if you do end up following your chosen path you don't know what other apparently completely unconnected skills are going to come in useful in later life and in future roles, and just because Alio didn't pay attention in accounting and you didn't care about your electives doesn't mean that you won't need them in the future and regret not paying attention just like Alio, nor does it mean that others didn't pay attention and won't value them at some point in the future.

Education for education's sake is good. We need to stop tying everything that everyone does, especially kids in their late teens and early twenties, into hardline capitalistic values. Education in general makes people smarter, more inquisitive, more interesting and more rounded. It's a thing that as a society we should be encouraging and paying for.

Your ideologies make sense, but in real life it doesn't really work that way.

1.  Unless you want to be a doctor or an engineer, when you go to college you're paying for a diploma, not the information you learn.  Most of what you learn in the classroom isn't important.

2.  The good Universities in America cost 10s of thousands of dollars a year.  If I only need to take 60 credits of courses relating to my major, making me take another 60 credits in random subjects in order to graduate is asinine if the end result is that I need to pay an extra $30k-$60k.  I'm not paying the University to be my life coach and encourage me to learn about African American studies or Greek Mythology.  I'm paying to "learn" how to perform a trade.

3.  If you're going to school and don't have some semblance of what you want to do with your life, you shouldn't be in college.  I didn't know what I wanted to do and I wasted a good chunk of my time and money with classes I didn't want, need, or care about.  There are millions of kids every year who do the same.  I understand that you need a degree to get a job in the U.S. but getting a degree to have a degree seems utterly pointless in my eyes.  This idea really needs to change.

4.  Nobody who was an econ major took one Women's studies class and decided they wanted to study the history of woman over the past 200 years
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 24, 2016, 08:13:28 AM
I mean there's a degree to which you're both right. I think the far out there nonsense with zero practical use is shitty and a waste.  Ie like you said woman's studys music history.

But then there's also practical stuff that has a wider application. Like accounting, math, English/writing,  economics.   I think as long as the "other stuff"  offers real world application it can be a very good thing.  When it doesn't, I think more often than not it's a poor use of one's money.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 24, 2016, 09:18:42 AM
I agree that learning about a broad range of topics is imporant for personl growth, im paying for a degree ina particular field.  I shouldnt have to pay thousands of dollars for a gym class.  Im perfectly capable of reading up on historical figures or learning about electrical engineering on my own time.

I understand your point. Still, as I've said, there are scientific studies that show that taking the breadth of courses actually improves you not only as a student but as a future member of the workforce.

Also, let's be honest. The vast majority of people would absolutely not pick up a history book if not forced to by their coursework.

Your ideologies make sense, but in real life it doesn't really work that way.

1.  Unless you want to be a doctor or an engineer, when you go to college you're paying for a diploma, not the information you learn.  Most of what you learn in the classroom isn't important.

This is completely true, and actually supports my point better than yours.

Part of the appeal to corporate America of a "well-rounded" student is the ability to approach problems in creative "outside the box" ways. You learn this in college by being exposed to material (and professors) with varied topics and methodologies. Again, if you were pigeonholed to a specific set of limited knowledge you'd have far less basis to think about answers from a different point of view from everyone who came before you.

College isn't about teaching you answers. It's about learning how to come up with your own.

2.  The good Universities in America cost 10s of thousands of dollars a year.  If I only need to take 60 credits of courses relating to my major, making me take another 60 credits in random subjects in order to graduate is asinine if the end result is that I need to pay an extra $30k-$60k.  I'm not paying the University to be my life coach and encourage me to learn about African American studies or Greek Mythology.  I'm paying to "learn" how to perform a trade.

If all you want is to learn a "trade" then there are trade schools in ample supply. Those are careers where there is generally not much "outside the box" problem solving. Replacing an alternator is a mechanical procedure. Taking blood in a physician's office doesn't allow a PA much in the way of alternative methods.

3.  If you're going to school and don't have some semblance of what you want to do with your life, you shouldn't be in college.  I didn't know what I wanted to do and I wasted a good chunk of my time and money with classes I didn't want, need, or care about.  There are millions of kids every year who do the same.  I understand that you need a degree to get a job in the U.S. but getting a degree to have a degree seems utterly pointless in my eyes.  This idea really needs to change.

No, it doesn't. We're no longer a manufacturing or farming society. We need people who can work at desks or in laboratories. The problem isn't that a college wasted someone's money, it's that individuals aren't valuing the critical importance of going to college in contemporary American society.

A bachelor's degree is the new high school diploma. You can either choose to accept that, or be really good at smiling while asking if I'd like medium or large fries with my order. A high school diploma wasn't required when my parents dropped out. Times change.

4.  Nobody who was an econ major took one Women's studies class and decided they wanted to study the history of woman over the past 200 years

But maybe that professor taught a student a new appreciation for women's issues. Maybe that inspired that econ major to study the economic impact of lower salaries for women. Maybe that study leads to a woman someday making the same money with the same respect as her male peers. Maybe that woman develops the cure to liver cancer thanks to receiving the same kind of funding her male peers receive.

That's the point of higher education. To create a better society with better overall knowledge and understanding of the world we live in.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 24, 2016, 09:38:33 AM
Your school had a gym class requirement?  Are you sure you weren't in a high school?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 24, 2016, 09:43:32 AM
Your school had a gym class requirement?  Are you sure you weren't in a high school?

I don't know about other places, but in NY and Massachusetts physical fitness is a requirement for graduation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 24, 2016, 09:51:28 AM
Your ideologies make sense, but in real life it doesn't really work that way.

1.  Unless you want to be a doctor or an engineer, when you go to college you're paying for a diploma, not the information you learn.  Most of what you learn in the classroom isn't important.

That's incredibly debatable.

Quote
2.  The good Universities in America cost 10s of thousands of dollars a year.  If I only need to take 60 credits of courses relating to my major, making me take another 60 credits in random subjects in order to graduate is asinine if the end result is that I need to pay an extra $30k-$60k.  I'm not paying the University to be my life coach and encourage me to learn about African American studies or Greek Mythology.  I'm paying to "learn" how to perform a trade.

The idea is to identify areas of study that actually can benefit you later in life by changing the way that you think and the logical process.  You shouldn't have to take courses in African American studies or Greek Mythology, but those are examples of course offerings in areas that students absolutely should study in order to benefit their thought processes.  As was said later in the thread, there's absolutely a benefit.

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/why-study-humanities-what-i-tell-engineering-freshmen/

Quote
3.  If you're going to school and don't have some semblance of what you want to do with your life, you shouldn't be in college.  I didn't know what I wanted to do and I wasted a good chunk of my time and money with classes I didn't want, need, or care about.  There are millions of kids every year who do the same.  I understand that you need a degree to get a job in the U.S. but getting a degree to have a degree seems utterly pointless in my eyes.  This idea really needs to change.

I agree and disagree.  Disagree with the first part, that you need to have your life planned out before even going to college.  If you have a demonstrated intellectual capability and work ethic but aren't sure what to do quite yet, you should absolutely be in college improving your mode of thinking and narrowing your life goals.

However, I also agree it's retarded that we expect people to have a degree for most of the jobs in this country.  We need more vocational training in high school.  Use internships in high school as a way to learn trades while providing the needed coursework as well.  Too many kids take 5 classes in high school when a 6th could offer trade courses and then turn into on the job learning as seniors.  We then funnel those kids into college by telling them it's the necessary next step.  In most countries, a high school diploma is sufficient for a lot of the jobs we require a college diploma for here.  You don't need broad based coursework (or any, really) to be an office manager.

Quote
4.  Nobody who was an econ major took one Women's studies class and decided they wanted to study the history of woman over the past 200 years

I'm sure someone did.  I knew a guy in college who was Pre Med and a HumBio major.  He took a medieval studies course and switched majors to Medieval Studies.  Still went to Harvard Med School.  Shockingly enough, as long as you take the necessary prereq work, a lot of grad schools value 'fuzzy' degrees, just as a lot of tech companies value employees who have a broad educational background.  There are modes of learning that are taught by unrelated coursework.  As I found out recently, Physics majors and PhDs are often targeted by economic consulting firms because of the demonstrated benefit.  It may not make sense, and the actual course content may not help, but the course itself absolutely does in most situations.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 24, 2016, 09:51:45 AM
I don't know about other places, but in NY and Massachusetts physical fitness is a requirement for graduation.

That's ridiculous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 24, 2016, 10:03:05 AM
My university had a requirement that you had to take 2 credit hours of phys ed, one of which had to be a class called PE 100, which required you to (by the end of the course) either be able to run/walk 3 miles in less than 30 minutes or be able to jog without walking for 30 minutes regardless of pace.  You also had to meet some weight lifting goals that I can't remember.  I don't know if that's still the case.  Probably not.

My wife's university required two PE courses plus they had to pass a swimming test in order to graduate.  The swimming test part was taken away in recent years, but it had been part of the graduation requirement since my parents went there in the 60's.  It was funny because my wife was in the exercise sports science department and had to help students learn to swim that couldn't pass the test.  She said she had to help quite a few large athletes (linemen on the football team) that couldn't swim.  She said some of them were borderline crying due to fear of the water.

Both are large public universities in NC. 

I think PE courses are a good thing for all students to take, but I just don't know how you could enforce the requirement these days with the way lawsuits are running rampant.  To me, it's no different than everyone having to take courses in the English Department when you are a Math major.  BTW I think everyone should have to take some classes outside their path of study.  I didn't particularly enjoy taking Sociology and Public Speaking as courses in college, but I'm probably better off for having done it. 

The issue with PE is that there are people with physical disabilities that may have trouble with certain things in order to pass, not to mention there are grossly obese people that can't even watch someone run without gasping for air.  I don't know how to design a phys. ed. course that allows everyone a reasonable chance at passing, while still ensuring everyone has to actually, you know, DO something.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 24, 2016, 10:14:59 AM
Your school had a gym class requirement?  Are you sure you weren't in a high school?

Community colleges do that

Usually ones that people refer to as 13th grade

I know people who went to Suffolk community college and had to take like gym and tennis and retarded excrement
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 24, 2016, 10:15:30 AM
That's ridiculous.

I can't really argue that, but the requirement is there like it or not. It's probably the mentality that "if we force you into good habits you'll carry them with you afterward."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 24, 2016, 04:03:52 PM
People took PE classes when I was in school, but it was like an extra thing just to have the activity.  Most people did golf or tennis just to get the instruction.  It wasn't a requirement.  I don't get the requirement part.  The classes didn't count toward your unit requirement.  They were just activities.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 24, 2016, 04:05:38 PM
People took PE classes when I was in school, but it was like an extra thing just to have the activity.  Most people did golf or tennis just to get the instruction.  It wasn't a requirement.  I don't get the requirement part.  The classes didn't count toward your unit requirement.  They were just activities.

Damn, I don't think I'd do that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 24, 2016, 04:07:55 PM
Iggy, do you think PE should be a requirement for kids in grade school and high school?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 24, 2016, 04:27:44 PM
Your school had a gym class requirement?  Are you sure you weren't in a high school?
So did mine (state school) and my wife's (private college).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 24, 2016, 05:40:23 PM
Iggy, do you think PE should be a requirement for kids in grade school and high school?

Absolutely, although PE is disappearing from elementary schools from what I hear.  My kids still have it every day.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 24, 2016, 05:49:31 PM
Absolutely, although PE is disappearing from elementary schools from what I hear.  My kids still have it every day.

Obesity epidemic, let's not teach young kids how to exercise

Makes sense

I think doing it for kids is hugely important since that's how many learn to get physical exercise

For college it's just stupid
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 24, 2016, 06:10:43 PM
Funny as most kids age they exercise less, it's probably more important in college versus kids. Anyway, I had to do it in College as well. I took tennis and volleyball. Who cares if it's a requirement or not. I am almost as active now as I was then. That's almost across the board not true of most people my age.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 24, 2016, 06:19:21 PM
Funny as most kids age they exercise less, it's probably more important in college versus kids. Anyway, I had to do it in College as well. I took tennis and volleyball. Who cares if it's a requirement or not. I am almost as active now as I was then. That's almost across the board not true of most people my age.

True, but it's more about teaching than the actual doing

Young kids don't know about different sports and exercise or have never experienced them before

Grown adults just don't give a freak or are too lazy

Can't teach someone the will to , just the how
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 24, 2016, 06:21:30 PM
Funny as most kids age they exercise less, it's probably more important in college versus kids. Anyway, I had to do it in College as well. I took tennis and volleyball. Who cares if it's a requirement or not. I am almost as active now as I was then. That's almost across the board not true of most people my age.
I think the reasons change for exercise, but the importance doesn't as people age.  You need it as a kid to establish habits and burn some craziness off so you can concentrate.  Plus kids learn a lot by playing.  It's important in college so you can maintain some semblance of health and don't start bad habits, become a fatass and die early.  It doesn't always work but it's still worth trying.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 24, 2016, 06:31:29 PM
Funny as most kids age they exercise less, it's probably more important in college versus kids. Anyway, I had to do it in College as well. I took tennis and volleyball. Who cares if it's a requirement or not. I am almost as active now as I was then. That's almost across the board not true of most people my age.

I read somewhere that people who are more active as children actually have an easier time maintaining a healthy weight later in life than those who don't. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 24, 2016, 06:43:28 PM
I read somewhere that people who are more active as children actually have an easier time maintaining a healthy weight later in life than those who don't.
Kids mud runs.  Building warriors.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 24, 2016, 06:52:54 PM
I read somewhere that people who are more active as children actually have an easier time maintaining a healthy weight later in life than those who don't. 

It's probably true, my post was more of an observation really. A lot of people do not exercise enough as they age. Of course now it's even more important to get kids into sports/exercise, with the digitized world working against that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on August 24, 2016, 07:58:30 PM
@iggy and @alio. Im not going to argue with you guys on this topic because its clear that we have different viewpoints on the purpose of college.  I do want to bring up one point that iggy mentioned which is what im alluding to when i talk about "knowing" what you want to do with your life when you graduate.

Internships.

There is no reason why a high school student can not do the internship work of a college student.  Hell I've joked with my friends when we first entered the workforce that our entry level jobs couldve been done by our highschool selves. 

To piggyback on one of your points.  The issue is that companys force you to get a degree to land a job.  I think alot of our workforce issues could be fixed if business leaders adjusted their mindset on what they need from employees.  The graduating students of this generation will be so much better off spending 6 months interning in a field theyre interested in before going to school for it.  This precents a waste of time and money on classes youre not interested in, and will provide motivation in college.  "Oh if i want to be an accountant I really need to focus on xyz because joe did that everyday".

I agree with both of your points ablut being well rounded.  Ive been using the past two years of my life to do just that.  Hell I work in advertising, but im teaching english in Thailand at the moment, but i think there is a time and place for it. 

In my opiniom clogging our universities with kids who are only going to college because its the next step is doing everyone a disservice.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 24, 2016, 10:55:22 PM

In my opiniom clogging our universities with kids who are only going to college because its the next step is doing everyone a disservice.

Yeah that was my bottom line point of agreement with you.  I think broad educational requirements are great.  I just don't think nearly as many people need to be in college in the first place.  It's an artificially inflated market.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on August 24, 2016, 11:09:15 PM
Yup, I definitely went to college because that's what I was supposed to do. I would have been better off just working for a few years. I either would have ended up doing the same type of excrement I'm already doing without the debt or realized the amount of work you get in college is a joke compared to the real world and done way better when I did go.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 24, 2016, 11:13:06 PM
People took PE classes when I was in school, but it was like an extra thing just to have the activity.  Most people did golf or tennis just to get the instruction.  It wasn't a requirement.  I don't get the requirement part.  The classes didn't count toward your unit requirement.  They were just activities.

They are a requirement these days.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 25, 2016, 09:00:52 AM
@iggy and @alio. Im not going to argue with you guys on this topic because its clear that we have different viewpoints on the purpose of college.  I do want to bring up one point that iggy mentioned which is what im alluding to when i talk about "knowing" what you want to do with your life when you graduate.

Internships.

There is no reason why a high school student can not do the internship work of a college student.  Hell I've joked with my friends when we first entered the workforce that our entry level jobs couldve been done by our highschool selves.

I can barely tolerate the recent college grads that work with me. I'd strangle a high school kid by the end of the first week.

To piggyback on one of your points.  The issue is that companys force you to get a degree to land a job.  I think alot of our workforce issues could be fixed if business leaders adjusted their mindset on what they need from employees.  The graduating students of this generation will be so much better off spending 6 months interning in a field theyre interested in before going to school for it.  This precents a waste of time and money on classes youre not interested in, and will provide motivation in college.  "Oh if i want to be an accountant I really need to focus on xyz because joe did that everyday".

Again, you're ignoring that evidence points to the fact that having a well-rounded education makes you a better overall employee--regardless of what job you perform. Saying that employers should adjust their mindset on what they need from employees is a bit ridiculous. You're making that argument solely for the benefit of the individual employee rather than the good of the company. I certainly trend liberal but even I wouldn't ever say a company should cater to the employee's needs over its own.

I agree with both of your points ablut being well rounded.  Ive been using the past two years of my life to do just that.  Hell I work in advertising, but im teaching english in Thailand at the moment, but i think there is a time and place for it. 

In my opiniom clogging our universities with kids who are only going to college because its the next step is doing everyone a disservice.

Yeah that was my bottom line point of agreement with you.  I think broad educational requirements are great.  I just don't think nearly as many people need to be in college in the first place.  It's an artificially inflated market.

I understand where you guys are coming from, I just completely disagree. Again, we unfortunately live in a country where manufacturing and farming jobs have been moved outside of our borders and they're not coming back.

There are very few jobs left that can be pigeonholed educationally. Examples like auto mechanic, physician's assistant, locksmith, and electrician--and these jobs have dedicated schools for specialized training. If you don't do that, and you don't go to college, what's left is mostly construction, fast-food work, or customer service jobs.

Where I do agree with Iggy is on the idea that we should be introducing more vocational training at the high school level. It's ridiculous that we no longer have classes like "shop" where students can determine if they'd be better off working with their hands. But that likely comes down to ever-shrinking educational budgets. It's probably also why Iggy's seeing a decrease in PE classes. Because why invest money into schools?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 25, 2016, 09:07:38 AM
What's everybody complaining about?  Rick's is hiring right outta high school. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 25, 2016, 06:53:35 PM
http://patch.com/rhode-island/barrington/ri-congressmans-sweeping-college-loan-bill-would-eliminate-student-loan

Some good, some bad out of this.

The thought of letting students pay off their student loans with pretax money (similar to a 401k) is a good idea I think people could bet behind. It encourages people to take responsibility for their actions and pay their own loans off. It's a great idea

Limiting student loan payments to 4% of an individual's paycheck is kinda stupid, like really freaking stupid. Demanding 0% interest rates for student loans while allowing students to pay them off over 30 years is also absurd. I'm cool with stopping predatory lending, but the government would lose hundreds of billions (if not substantially more)  of dollars lending out trillions of dollars interest free for 30 years.

Not to mention if people can get 30 year 0 APR loans on student loans they would be extremely wise to borrow as much as humanly possible as those numbers are ridiculous. It would also let colleges price gouge even more than they already do.

Improving student loans is a noble go, but some of these ideas are freaking idiotic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on August 25, 2016, 07:17:00 PM
http://patch.com/rhode-island/barrington/ri-congressmans-sweeping-college-loan-bill-would-eliminate-student-loan

Some good, some bad out of this.

The thought of letting students pay off their student loans with pretax money (similar to a 401k) is a good idea I think people could bet behind. It encourages people to take responsibility for their actions and pay their own loans off. It's a great idea

Limiting student loan payments to 4% of an individual's paycheck is kinda stupid, like really freaking stupid. Demanding 0% interest rates for student loans while allowing students to pay them off over 30 years is also absurd. I'm cool with stopping predatory lending, but the government would lose hundreds of billions (if not substantially more)  of dollars lending out trillions of dollars interest free for 30 years.

Not to mention if people can get 30 year 0 APR loans on student loans they would be extremely wise to borrow as much as humanly possible as those numbers are ridiculous. It would also let colleges price gouge even more than they already do.

Improving student loans is a noble go, but some of these ideas are freaking idiotic.

From my understanding england does something like this.  The amount you pay for your student loan depends on your salary if your job
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 25, 2016, 07:21:45 PM
From my understanding england does something like this.  The amount you pay for your student loan depends on your salary if your job

 A few schools here have tried it with great results.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 25, 2016, 07:24:05 PM
Not sure exactly how it works but we have something like that already.  the maximum they can make you pay is a percentage of your salary. I think currently it's 10 to 20% depending on where and how you got your loan

I feel like interest is absolutely necessary though for loans go work successfully
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 25, 2016, 07:26:57 PM

That's ridiculous.

It's great actually. A throwaway class that's easy and impossible to fail unless you don't show up.

Although I still had to write a paper at the end. Basically had to review one of the NBA playoff games. It was so stupid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 25, 2016, 07:38:32 PM
It's great actually. A throwaway class that's easy and impossible to fail unless you don't show up.

Although I still had to write a paper at the end. Basically had to review one of the NBA playoff games. It was so stupid.
Some of them aren't impossible to fail if you are obese.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 25, 2016, 07:39:19 PM

Some of them aren't impossible to fail if you are obese.

Just don't be obese.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 25, 2016, 07:42:51 PM
Just don't be obese.
Got it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 25, 2016, 11:51:55 PM
Not sure exactly how it works but we have something like that already.  the maximum they can make you pay is a percentage of your salary. I think currently it's 10 to 20% depending on where and how you got your loan

I feel like interest is absolutely necessary though for loans go work successfully

The UK is something like 10% of your annual salary once you're earning over a certain threshold, and the interest rate varies depending on your salary - the more you earn, the higher your interest rate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 26, 2016, 08:57:23 AM
I don't know details, but muslim banks are prohibited from charging interest and somehow they survive. I would think there would need to be regulations in place to ensure schools didn't suddenly drastically increase prices, and to prevent students from taking far more than they need, but that's doable.

Lowering the required percentage of income for repayment is a good idea too. It would free up more of a young person's income for investment/expenditure, which benefits the overall economy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 26, 2016, 09:14:40 AM
I don't know details, but muslim banks are prohibited from charging interest and somehow they survive. I would think there would need to be regulations in place to ensure schools didn't suddenly drastically increase prices, and to prevent students from taking far more than they need, but that's doable.

Lowering the required percentage of income for repayment is a good idea too. It would free up more of a young person's income for investment/expenditure, which benefits the overall economy.

No interest is absurd.. Low interest is feasible

It's literally impossible to lend money at 0% and not lose money (unless you're talking like selling a car and doing 0% APR for 3 years but that's different)

Essentially having government loans similar to what we have now and removing the profit and just making it cost neutral is really all you need.

If a student opts to pay a lower % of their salary or pay it off over a longer period of time the interest rates should reflect that.

It really would be a simple system that I think most people can get behind.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 26, 2016, 09:36:12 AM
No interest is absurd.. Low interest is feasible

It's literally impossible to lend money at 0% and not lose money (unless you're talking like selling a car and doing 0% APR for 3 years but that's different)

Essentially having government loans similar to what we have now and removing the profit and just making it cost neutral is really all you need.

If a student opts to pay a lower % of their salary or pay it off over a longer period of time the interest rates should reflect that.

It really would be a simple system that I think most people can get behind.

Muslim banks are able to manage no-interest loans. Stop pretending it's impossible just because you don't like the idea.

We're not talking about a luxury item like a car here. We're talking about a necessity in the modern US economy. On top of that, you're freeing that person to spend that "saved" money directly in the economy, which generates tax revenue. It's an investment by the government.

The US government somehow finds funding for nuclear weapons that are likely to never be used--yet you don't complain about that sunk cost. I think investing in the future labor force is a reasonably more noble pursuit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 26, 2016, 09:39:34 AM
No interest is absurd.. Low interest is feasible

It's literally impossible to lend money at 0% and not lose money (unless you're talking like selling a car and doing 0% APR for 3 years but that's different)

Essentially having government loans similar to what we have now and removing the profit and just making it cost neutral is really all you need.

If a student opts to pay a lower % of their salary or pay it off over a longer period of time the interest rates should reflect that.

It really would be a simple system that I think most people can get behind.

Nah, we should have free college for all and loan forgiveness because people were forced at gunpoint to take out predatory loans in the past.

I prefer ISAs.  Demand based pricing for colleges would absolutely get those schools to emphasize careers in tech with guaranteed salaries and push them to boost their relationships with the career center.  It's a win win.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 26, 2016, 09:42:17 AM
I don't know details, but muslim banks are prohibited from charging interest and somehow they survive.

Sharia finance is interesting, they have ways around it. I believe the most common way is for them to assume asset ownership and effectively become the vendor. For example, let's say you needed to borrow $20K to buy a car. Rather than lending you $20K and charging you for the use of their money, the bank would actually buy the car for $20K and then agree to sell it to you for $24K, with an arrangement in place for you to make equal monthly payments of $400 for 60 months. This way the bank isn't charging interest, they're making profit on a capital sale and giving you an easy payment plan, neither of which are prevented by sharia. In practice it's exactly the same thing as a secured loan.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 26, 2016, 09:57:31 AM
Muslim banks are able to manage no-interest loans. Stop pretending it's impossible just because you don't like the idea.

We're not talking about a luxury item like a car here. We're talking about a necessity in the modern US economy. On top of that, you're freeing that person to spend that "saved" money directly in the economy, which generates tax revenue. It's an investment by the government.

The US government somehow finds funding for nuclear weapons that are likely to never be used--yet you don't complain about that sunk cost. I think investing in the future labor force is a reasonably more noble pursuit.

You realize the United States is at a deficit right?  Which means in order to lend out money were effectively borrowing it from somebody else (probably China)  and paying them interest on it. Then factor in the time value of money, plus a percentage of people that will default. And you're talking about losing hundreds of billions of dollars.

Now I don't think we should try to profit off them. I think its completely not the governments place at all. But making it lose absurd amount of money is not the solution. Cost neutral is the only way you could get significant support from both parties

Plus you also need to understand if there's 0% interest it would be financially STUPID for people to do anything other than borrow as much money as possible and pay it off as slowly and long term as possible
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 26, 2016, 11:51:33 AM

You realize the United States is at a deficit right?  Which means in order to lend out money were effectively borrowing it from somebody else (probably China)  and paying them interest on it. Then factor in the time value of money, plus a percentage of people that will default. And you're talking about losing hundreds of billions of dollars.

I hate when people bring up China when talking about US debt. We issue bonds when our expenditures are set to outpace receipts. And the vast majority of holders and people that take on US debt are US citizens and US funds. Probably a quarter of it is borrowed from foreign governments, and China represents about less than a quarter of a quarter of that.

Not saying we should keep issuing debt, but we can pretty much keep doing it because US debt is the safest form of investment in the world.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 26, 2016, 11:55:58 AM

I don't know details, but muslim banks are prohibited from charging interest and somehow they survive. I would think there would need to be regulations in place to ensure schools didn't suddenly drastically increase prices, and to prevent students from taking far more than they need, but that's doable.

Lowering the required percentage of income for repayment is a good idea too. It would free up more of a young person's income for investment/expenditure, which benefits the overall economy.

It's already difficult for most students in low income brackets to obtain private loans since their parents acting as co-signors probably have bad credit, but making the banks look into their majors and grades to determine whether or not they're going to be able to find a job that can allow the student to afford to pay off the debt is just going to be another hurdle. Banks will just get stingier. Unless you want the government to force banks to lend to kids who want to pay $100k for an arts degree.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 26, 2016, 12:09:36 PM
I hate when people bring up China when talking about US debt. We issue bonds when our expenditures are set to outpace receipts. And the vast majority of holders and people that take on US debt are US citizens and US funds. Probably a quarter of it is borrowed from foreign governments, and China represents about less than a quarter of a quarter of that.

Not saying we should keep issuing debt, but we can pretty much keep doing it because US debt is the safest form of investment in the world.

Regardless when we borrow money the government loses money. 0% interest student loans would effectively be an entitlement program costing hundreds of billions of dollars. I didn't realize China owns much less of our debt than the media makes it out to be, but the point was about losing money more so than who to lose it to.

We currently have well over 1 trillion dollars in outstanding student loans. If suddenly student loans were interest free and could be paid off over long periods of time (ie 30 years)  plus the expanding emphasis on college. That number could easily multiply several fold.

Which would just be monstrously expensive

And that's before even factor in the absurd amount of money we would lose from inflation as well, which would probably be even greater than our cost of borrowing that money to begin with.

Looking at the current student loan rates (4-6%)  I can't imagine them getting a whole lot lower than that. And the 6% numbers was only for graduate school
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 26, 2016, 12:33:11 PM
Sharia finance is interesting, they have ways around it. I believe the most common way is for them to assume asset ownership and effectively become the vendor. For example, let's say you needed to borrow $20K to buy a car. Rather than lending you $20K and charging you for the use of their money, the bank would actually buy the car for $20K and then agree to sell it to you for $24K, with an arrangement in place for you to make equal monthly payments of $400 for 60 months. This way the bank isn't charging interest, they're making profit on a capital sale and giving you an easy payment plan, neither of which are prevented by sharia. In practice it's exactly the same thing as a secured loan.

Again, I'm speaking from mostly ignorance of the subject, but isn't that more for commercial loans? They don't generally do that for individual debt I thought. I'm pretty sure there is no penalty for any missed or late payments either.

You realize the United States is at a deficit right?  Which means in order to lend out money were effectively borrowing it from somebody else (probably China)  and paying them interest on it. Then factor in the time value of money, plus a percentage of people that will default. And you're talking about losing hundreds of billions of dollars.

Now I don't think we should try to profit off them. I think its completely not the governments place at all. But making it lose absurd amount of money is not the solution. Cost neutral is the only way you could get significant support from both parties

Plus you also need to understand if there's 0% interest it would be financially STUPID for people to do anything other than borrow as much money as possible and pay it off as slowly and long term as possible

So we should repair the deficit by cutting back on unneeded items like nuclear missiles, no? I mean, if you have one or two of them, you're pretty much in the MAD club. The idea is to not use them. The US has an estimated 70 thousand of them. Again, you're not complaining about that money being flushed down the toilet--and there's zero potential for ROI with them. At least those the government pays to educate should become productive--tax paying--contributors to the American economy.

You're saying the government would "lose an absurd amount" on no-interest loans. First of all, if you read the article, it's proposing a standard (albeit lower) payroll percentage to be paid back. It would also mandate pre-tax payroll deductions. So your "pay it off as slowly and long term as possible" argument is void. It would be a standard payback--no defaulting. Sure, the individual could just not work to avoid it, but who does that hurt in the end?

And you keep saying "borrow as much money as possible" as if it were a reasonable argument. Today banks are willing to give you more than you need on a student loan because they profit from it. The government would disburse the exact amount you needed to cover your defined costs by the institution. It wouldn't be a free-for-all rush to refinance your parents' home or to buy you a new car.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 26, 2016, 12:35:10 PM
It's already difficult for most students in low income brackets to obtain private loans since their parents acting as co-signors probably have bad credit, but making the banks look into their majors and grades to determine whether or not they're going to be able to find a job that can allow the student to afford to pay off the debt is just going to be another hurdle. Banks will just get stingier. Unless you want the government to force banks to lend to kids who want to pay $100k for an arts degree.

I'm advocating removing banks from the process completely.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 26, 2016, 12:48:40 PM
Again, I'm speaking from mostly ignorance of the subject, but isn't that more for commercial loans? They don't generally do that for individual debt I thought. I'm pretty sure there is no penalty for any missed or late payments either.

So we should repair the deficit by cutting back on unneeded items like nuclear missiles, no? I mean, if you have one or two of them, you're pretty much in the MAD club. The idea is to not use them. The US has an estimated 70 thousand of them. Again, you're not complaining about that money being flushed down the toilet--and there's zero potential for ROI with them. At least those the government pays to educate should become productive--tax paying--contributors to the American economy.

You're saying the government would "lose an absurd amount" on no-interest loans. First of all, if you read the article, it's proposing a standard (albeit lower) payroll percentage to be paid back. It would also mandate pre-tax payroll deductions. So your "pay it off as slowly and long term as possible" argument is void. It would be a standard payback--no defaulting. Sure, the individual could just not work to avoid it, but who does that hurt in the end?

And you keep saying "borrow as much money as possible" as if it were a reasonable argument. Today banks are willing to give you more than you need on a student loan because they profit from it. The government would disburse the exact amount you needed to cover your defined costs by the institution. It wouldn't be a free-for-all rush to refinance your parents' home or to buy you a new car.

National security is a vastly more complicated issue I'm not going to pretend to grasp. But of course I agree we should reduce expenditures there as well.

The standard payback was more so a limit on how much of your salary they could make you payback. Up to 4% of your check (or rather at minimum you had to pay back 4% of your check) so if you're making 50k a year and you have 50k in student loans it'll take you 25 years to pay it off (assuming that's pretax money like we mentioned) that's an extraordinarily long time for interest free money to be loaned out.

Not to mention the government would lose even more money on it since that income isn't be taxed as well.

In this scenario it would effectively be a massive entitlement program costing the government hundreds of billions of dollars, if not more.

And yes if interest was lower people would borrow more. It's the most basic of economic theories.

I understand they wouldn't be able to refinance their homes or anything. But they would be more willing and abled to borrow absolutely everything possible. They could go to much more expensive schools, borrow 100% of the costs of school (instead of pay for some of it when possible)  borrow loans for 100% of the books etc etc. People would lose out by not taking advantage of this 0% loan.

I agree with you the government can make it much better for students, I do. But 0% student loans is so ridiculously absurd and terrible  that I can't imagine a single person with a background in economics not laughing st it. (im not pretending to be an economic or financial expert by any means, but it's so insanely bad that I can even see that plain as day)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 26, 2016, 12:50:31 PM

I'm advocating removing banks from the process completely.

So you want us to all pay for all those $100k art degrees? Or would you rather have the government act as a bank and do the lending?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 26, 2016, 02:29:11 PM
National security is a vastly more complicated issue I'm not going to pretend to grasp. But of course I agree we should reduce expenditures there as well.

The standard payback was more so a limit on how much of your salary they could make you payback. Up to 4% of your check (or rather at minimum you had to pay back 4% of your check) so if you're making 50k a year and you have 50k in student loans it'll take you 25 years to pay it off (assuming that's pretax money like we mentioned) that's an extraordinarily long time for interest free money to be loaned out.

It would be 4% of your gross income. Period. Yes, it would be a long-term loan. So what? That money can be de-funded elsewhere (like 69,999 nukes that'll never have an opportunity to be used) and re-invested in our nation's long-term workforce.

Not to mention the government would lose even more money on it since that income isn't be taxed as well.

In this scenario it would effectively be a massive entitlement program costing the government hundreds of billions of dollars, if not more.

That $50k-making young person may not be paying taxes on that 4%, but s/he's paying taxes. And buying goods.

Stop calling it an entitlement program. I won't argue over those, but this isn't a handout program in the least. It's still a loan that needs to be repaid--and will be, forcibly.

And yes if interest was lower people would borrow more. It's the most basic of economic theories.

I understand they wouldn't be able to refinance their homes or anything. But they would be more willing and abled to borrow absolutely everything possible. They could go to much more expensive schools, borrow 100% of the costs of school (instead of pay for some of it when possible)  borrow loans for 100% of the books etc etc. People would lose out by not taking advantage of this 0% loan.

Yes, they would finance whatever they were not issued in scholarships. Like they do now. So what?

No one would be borrowing "more" than they need. The people who would pay some cost up front to avoid paying it back later would either continue to be those people or they'd invest that saved money.

I agree with you the government can make it much better for students, I do. But 0% student loans is so ridiculously absurd and terrible  that I can't imagine a single person with a background in economics not laughing st it. (im not pretending to be an economic or financial expert by any means, but it's so insanely bad that I can even see that plain as day)

You admit to not being an expert, yet you use "ridiculously absurd and terrible" hyperbole simply because you don't like the idea.

Let me pose a question to you. If the money for a "0% student loan" program came directly out of welfare and was completely funded with money otherwise dedicated to that program, would you be amenable to it?

So you want us to all pay for all those $100k art degrees? Or would you rather have the government act as a bank and do the lending?

I'm not at all saying it should be a handout. I wouldn't even advocate free degrees for rocket scientists and doctors (though I'd be okay if there was a program that allowed them to provide service in exchange for debt-reduction). I'm saying the government should do the lending as a pseudo-bank, granting those loans without any interest attached--but still requiring 100% repayment of every dollar.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 26, 2016, 02:41:55 PM
It would be 4% of your gross income. Period. Yes, it would be a long-term loan. So what? That money can be de-funded elsewhere (like 69,999 nukes that'll never have an opportunity to be used) and re-invested in our nation's long-term workforce.

That $50k-making young person may not be paying taxes on that 4%, but s/he's paying taxes. And buying goods.

Stop calling it an entitlement program. I won't argue over those, but this isn't a handout program in the least. It's still a loan that needs to be repaid--and will be, forcibly.

Yes, they would finance whatever they were not issued in scholarships. Like they do now. So what?

No one would be borrowing "more" than they need. The people who would pay some cost up front to avoid paying it back later would either continue to be those people or they'd invest that saved money.

You admit to not being an expert, yet you use "ridiculously absurd and terrible" hyperbole simply because you don't like the idea.

Let me pose a question to you. If the money for a "0% student loan" program came directly out of welfare and was completely funded with money otherwise dedicated to that program, would you be amenable to it?

I'm not at all saying it should be a handout. I wouldn't even advocate free degrees for rocket scientists and doctors (though I'd be okay if there was a program that allowed them to provide service in exchange for debt-reduction). I'm saying the government should do the lending as a pseudo-bank, granting those loans without any interest attached--but still requiring 100% repayment of every dollar.

Yes because defunding the money elsewhere is so simple. We have a ridiculous amount of debt we can't pay off.

Have a huge looming healthcare crisis which is going to cost a ton to fix.

Social security on the path to bankruptcy,  again going to cost a ton.

We just got out of a housing crisis where people couldn't afford their homes

Around half a trillion dollars in student loans the government will probably have to eat from students defaulting

But pulling money out of our derriere to fund a huge entitlement program should be easy.

This is absolutely an entitlement program, because the government would be eating the bill of hundreds of billions if not trillions to fund it. I understand it's very different from a typical entitlement program as it requires people to hold some accountability for themselves, but long term 0% APR loans have significant economical value.

You're completely ignoring the time value of money and just how expensive this is.

The government offers mortgages which I think most  people could argue a place to live is more important than extra education. Yet the government doesn't offer 0% APR mortgages, despite the house that a mortgage is a much safer loan since there are tangible assets as collateral.

And I don't need to be an expert to point out how absurd 25 year 0% loans are, because it's thst stupid.

And no I wouldn't be amenable to it if it came out of welfare. Because those people on welfare "need"  it. And one way or another they would end up getting services which would have a financial impact.

I don't see why you find low APR student loans so objectable. It's the only way you could keep government loans cost neutral and attempt to encourage potential students to be financially responsible.

0% APR is an extremely sloppy and ineffective fix.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 26, 2016, 08:24:40 PM
dcm is right, tuition-free public universities are a much better solution than the government issuing interest free student loans.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 26, 2016, 09:14:34 PM
dcm is right, tuition-free public universities are a much better solution than the government issuing interest free student loans.

It would definitely  be cheaper
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 26, 2016, 11:33:32 PM

dcm is right, tuition-free public universities are a much better solution than the government issuing interest free student loans.

Yeah I wouldn't mind my tax dollars being spent on more federally funded community, technical, and state schools. Having the government acting as a bank for student loans for private colleges is just dumb.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 26, 2016, 11:33:53 PM
How the freak is my new avatar even remotely SFW?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on August 27, 2016, 01:47:13 AM
How the freak is my new avatar even remotely SFW?
Because you have a baby dick
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 27, 2016, 02:01:03 AM
How the freak is my new avatar even remotely SFW?

It may not be but it's freaking fantastic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 27, 2016, 03:17:33 AM
It may not be but it's freaking fantastic.

x2

I couldn't stop laughing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 27, 2016, 08:03:30 AM
How the freak is my new avatar even remotely SFW?

It's SFW because your rooster is too small to see.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on August 27, 2016, 09:02:55 AM
There's a Sayuki tiny asian rooster joke in there somewhere

There's nothing I love more than the taste of cum.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on August 27, 2016, 11:12:59 PM
I thought of a good analogy for our discussion about figurimg out what you want to do with your life whike youre in college.

Paying thousands of dollars to attend college so you can figure out what you want to do with your life is like buying a new car so you can drive it and decide whether you like it.

You can test drive a car, hell you can even buy used cars to see which type of car best fits your lifestyle.  But, to make that large of an investment is fiscally irresponsible.  Especially when you don't have alot of money to begin with.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 28, 2016, 10:44:36 PM
http://nypost.com/2016/08/28/anthony-weiner-sexted-busty-brunette-while-his-son-was-in-bed-with-him/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Koz on August 29, 2016, 07:54:53 AM
Weiner is truly a mental patient. He's sick to the point where he just doesn't give a excrement about being caught anymore.   Would he not expect that his most recent photo was to end up on the cover of the NY Post soon after the exchange with his interwebz friend?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 29, 2016, 08:05:49 AM
Weiner is truly a mental patient. He's sick to the point where he just doesn't give a excrement about being caught anymore.   Would he not expect that his most recent photo was to end up on the cover of the NY Post soon after the exchange with his interwebz friend?
That chick is smoking hot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Koz on August 29, 2016, 08:14:46 AM
^ Indeed. That being said, what normal person takes a dick pic with their kid laying next to them? 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 29, 2016, 08:34:11 AM
^ Indeed. That being said, what normal person takes a dick pic with their kid laying next to them?
But is he electable?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Koz on August 29, 2016, 08:53:26 AM
He finally wised up and deleted his Twitter account, though a bit late.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 29, 2016, 09:39:06 AM
The freak is wrong with this guy? Get a burner phone or something and start texting. Does everything have to be via Twitter?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Koz on August 29, 2016, 09:52:09 AM
The freak is wrong with this guy? Get a burner phone or something and start texting. Does everything have to be via Twitter?
  A burner phone doesn't do you much good when you go out of your way to show your face.
He needs to be back in the AOL chat rooms.  A/S/L?
My first international romance was via an AOL chat room where I met some chick and then went out to buy a calling card so I could speak with her over the phone.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 29, 2016, 09:55:27 AM

  A burner phone doesn't do you much good when you go out of your way to show your face.
He needs to be back in the AOL chat rooms.  A/S/L?
My first international romance was via an AOL chat room where I met some chick and then went out to buy a calling card so I could speak with her over the phone.

Yeah especially if you're already known for this stuff. He should just use a fake name and talk to chicks who don't follow the news.

Ha. AOL. Those were the days. Albanian girls were on lockdown at home so AOL opened them up in more ways than one. I owe AOL a lot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Koz on August 29, 2016, 09:57:55 AM
Yeah especially if you're already known for this stuff. He should just use a fake name and talk to chicks who don't follow the news.

Ha. AOL. Those were the days. Albanian girls were on lockdown at home so AOL opened them up in more ways than one. I owe AOL a lot.

I also remember how f'ing annoying it was when using dial up and someone would call through on the house line, knocking you off your chat-room connection at just the right time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 29, 2016, 11:46:40 AM
The freak is wrong with this guy? Get a burner phone or something and start texting. Does everything have to be via Twitter?

Or just don't freak around on your wife.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 29, 2016, 11:49:49 AM
Or just don't freak around on your wife.
This.  If you are that messed up, get a divorce and show your dick to everyone
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 29, 2016, 01:07:39 PM

Or just don't freak around on your wife.

There had to be some political motivations involved in that marriage. Now that his future prospects for any type of public office is out the window, I don't know how that marriage has managed to last.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 29, 2016, 01:34:12 PM
There had to be some political motivations involved in that marriage. Now that his future prospects for any type of public office is out the window, I don't know how that marriage has managed to last.

She obviously likes his rooster as much as he does.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on August 30, 2016, 02:42:16 AM
Or just don't freak around on your wife.

I remember as a teenager hearing Chris Rock say "You're only faithful as your options."

I didn't really understand the magnitude of that until I was an adult, but I largely think it's true.  Weiner is far from the only (former) politician cheating on his wife. He just seems to be the one using zero discretion.





Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on August 30, 2016, 09:15:08 AM
I remember as a teenager hearing Chris Rock say "You're only faithful as your options."

I didn't really understand the magnitude of that until I was an adult, but I largely think it's true.  Weiner is far from the only (former) politician cheating on his wife. He just seems to be the one using zero discretion.

That's just a horseshit excuse for cheaters.  The fact that 'everyone does it' doesn't grant someone a pass.  Sorry.  If you actively want to get with someone else (not 'damn, if I wasn't married I'd be all over that' but 'I'm going to freak someone else'), you shouldn't be married.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on August 30, 2016, 11:03:07 AM
My girlfriend lets me cheat but only with guys
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on August 30, 2016, 11:38:42 AM
These people's ego's dwarf most people you know.

They can freak whoever they want, the idea is not to get caught.

I guarantee you Huma has seen Bill's dick.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on August 30, 2016, 03:55:14 PM
That's just a horseshit excuse for cheaters.  The fact that 'everyone does it' doesn't grant someone a pass.  Sorry.  If you actively want to get with someone else (not 'damn, if I wasn't married I'd be all over that' but 'I'm going to freak someone else'), you shouldn't be married.

Agreed unless you are a swinging couple. Someone hinted at having that arrangement to me when I said something similar a few years ago. Can't remember who it was.

I know I personally have had the opportunity to cheat in the past and never pursued it at all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 06, 2016, 10:12:47 AM
https://www.google.com/amp/nypost.com/2016/09/06/now-philippine-president-regrets-calling-obama-son-of-a-whore/amp/?client=ms-android-verizon

See Trump really isn't that outlandish
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 06, 2016, 04:40:21 PM
Agreed unless you are a swinging couple. Someone hinted at having that arrangement to me when I said something similar a few years ago. Can't remember who it was.

I know I personally have had the opportunity to cheat in the past and never pursued it at all.

That's true.  If they have an arrangement, more power to them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 06, 2016, 04:45:33 PM
A buddy of mine bragged about him and his wife having an "open relationship". Basically she caught him cheating, so they had a "compromise" that they'd each be allowed to sleep with others so long as it only happened when the other way out of town or something along those lines. Turns out she was a bigger slut than he anticipated, so she went all over the place, and needless to say he didn't get as much action. They officially separated about a year later. No one felt sorry for him because he'd constantly BRAG about his open relationship. What a moron.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on September 06, 2016, 04:45:39 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/nypost.com/2016/09/06/now-philippine-president-regrets-calling-obama-son-of-a-whore/amp/?client=ms-android-verizon

See Trump really isn't that outlandish

Comparing Donald Trump to Rodrigo Duterte is like comparing dog excrement to horse manure.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on September 06, 2016, 05:35:40 PM
Comparing Donald Trump to Rodrigo Duterte is like comparing dog excrement to horse manure.
Be careful how you speak about God King Emperor Trump
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on September 14, 2016, 11:10:24 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/14/politics/steve-king-gay-families/

What Congressman King should have said was that he wants to perpetuate antiquated, sexist gender roles.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 15, 2016, 06:32:45 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2016/09/14/politics/steve-king-gay-families/

What Congressman King should have said was that he wants to perpetuate antiquated, sexist gender roles.

How is wanting to see more women raising their children sexist? Many women actually prefer to be housewives and bring up their kids, but society for some reason has decided that if they don't become a "career woman" than they're excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on September 15, 2016, 06:40:40 AM
Someone get rid of that screaming blonde conservative spank bank goblin Tomi Lahren
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 15, 2016, 08:28:59 AM
How is wanting to see more women raising their children sexist? Many women actually prefer to be housewives and bring up their kids, but society for some reason has decided that if they don't become a "career woman" than they're excrement.

I didn't see anything sexist in what he said, either.  He never said a woman needed to stay home.  He just said having a father and a mother is ideal.  I think that's wrong as gender roles are now less defined.  However, I also think you're wrong about people thinking career women are excrement.  In fact, I see more of the opposite, that people consider it sad if a woman CHOOSES to have a career with children and a working husband.  They try to be PC and say "Oh, but their nanny is soooo great."  Where I think things have changed is that I see a ton of dads who are more involved with their kids and do the drop off and pick up, etc.  That's probably because people around here have very flexible schedules (I know way more single income homes where mom doesn't work at all than dad), but those seem to be the families that get the most "credit"...indirectly of course.  Wouldn't want to shame people with nannies.  I'm guilty of it too.  I think kids benefit from having family around, be it mom and dad or grandparents or cousins or whatever, but mostly because I see so many terrible nannies.  Thankfully, my wife and I were in a position that one or both of us could always be with the kids, much easier now that they're both in school.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 15, 2016, 08:30:09 AM
TL;DR  Not sexist, but gay people can make excellent parents and fill mother and father roles without needing one man one woman.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on September 15, 2016, 11:02:35 AM
TL;DR  Not sexist, but gay people can make excellent parents and fill mother and father roles without needing one man one woman.

Insinuating that gay couples can't provide the same quality of care to a child as a heterosexual couples is what I take issue with.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 15, 2016, 11:21:15 AM

Insinuating that gay couples can't provide the same quality of care to a child as a heterosexual couples is what I take issue with.

I don't think that they can't provide the same quality of care, but you're never going to stop most people from believing that a traditional family upbringing is better.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on September 15, 2016, 12:15:39 PM
I don't think that they can't provide the same quality of care, but you're never going to stop most people from believing that a traditional family upbringing is better.

Perhaps not but to deny tax benefits based on an arbitrary definition of the "traditional" family (which is what's being proposed) is discriminatory.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 15, 2016, 12:18:08 PM

Perhaps not but to deny tax benefits based on an arbitrary definition of the "traditional" family is discriminatory.

What tax benefits would be denied though? Honest question. Even single fathers can claim child credits on their taxes. I can't imagine being married to a man, which is now legal, could change that. If people are trying to change that then I agree with you. If you're raising a child then you deserve the tax credit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 16, 2016, 09:32:15 AM
I don't think that they can't provide the same quality of care, but you're never going to stop most people from believing that a traditional family upbringing is better.

And yet...

http://www.voanews.com/a/poll-us-catholics-more-accepting-of-non-traditional-families/2942169.html

This is Catholics, but I'd imagine they're less tolerant than society as a whole.  "Most" people don't really think one man one woman both living together is necessarily better.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 16, 2016, 09:43:13 AM
I don't think that they can't provide the same quality of care, but you're never going to stop most people from believing that a traditional family upbringing is better.

If that is the case, and I don't necessarily believe it to be, "most people" would be wrong.

Quote
Children in lesbian families felt less parental pressure to conform to gender stereotypes, were less likely to experience their own gender as superior and were more likely to be uncertain about future heterosexual romantic involvement. No differences were found on psychosocial adjustment. Gender typicality, gender contentedness and anticipated future heterosexual romantic involvement were significant predictors of psychosocial adjustment in both family types.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J461v03n02_05

Quote
We conclude that there is a clear consensus in the social science literature indicating that American children living within same-sex parent households fare just as well as those children residing within different-sex parent households over a wide array of well-being measures: academic performance, cognitive development, social development, psychological health, early sexual activity, and substance abuse. Our assessment of the literature is based on credible and methodologically sound studies that compare well-being outcomes of children residing within same-sex and different-sex parent families. Differences that exist in child well-being are largely due to socioeconomic circumstances and family stability.

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11113-014-9329-6

Quote
Extensive data available from more than 30 years of research reveal that children raised by gay and lesbian parents have demonstrated resilience with regard to social, psychological, and sexual health despite economic and legal disparities and social stigma. Many studies have demonstrated that children’s well-being is affected much more by their relationships with their parents, their parents’ sense of competence and security, and the presence of social and economic support for the family than by the gender or the sexual orientation of their parents.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15504280802177615
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 16, 2016, 10:56:58 AM
Wait. So they're saying that a loving home, in a decent community, with better-than-subsistence living is superior to having proper heterosexual parents?!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 16, 2016, 10:57:21 AM
If that is the case, and I don't necessarily believe it to be, "most people" would be wrong.

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1300/J461v03n02_05

http://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s11113-014-9329-6

http://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/15504280802177615

I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with same sex couples raising kids, and I bet they probably do get raised better, but they're comparing a very small sample size against a much much larger one. There are plenty of abusive and terrible parents out there, and I'd venture to say that same-sex couples are more likely to be upper class and well-educated. It's tough to compare the two, but maybe something like comparing same-sex couples against hetero families within similar income and educational levels.

But those statistics aside, I strongly believe that having both a father figure and a mother in any family is important in the development of a child. I don't expect that line of thinking to change anytime soon. And, it is still way too soon for people to rage against those who may think that way. Same-sex couples raising children, historically speaking, is still a very very new thing. It's going to take some time for the majority to accept it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 16, 2016, 03:42:37 PM
I'm not saying that there's anything wrong with same sex couples raising kids, and I bet they probably do get raised better, but they're comparing a very small sample size against a much much larger one. There are plenty of abusive and terrible parents out there, and I'd venture to say that same-sex couples are more likely to be upper class and well-educated. It's tough to compare the two, but maybe something like comparing same-sex couples against hetero families within similar income and educational levels.

But those statistics aside, I strongly believe that having both a father figure and a mother in any family is important in the development of a child. I don't expect that line of thinking to change anytime soon. And, it is still way too soon for people to rage against those who may think that way. Same-sex couples raising children, historically speaking, is still a very very new thing. It's going to take some time for the majority to accept it.

You were raised with a father and a mother.  If you turned out this way with the best possible combination of parents, I shudder to think what you would be like in a single parent or gay household.  Patrick Bateman would look upon you with disgust.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on September 16, 2016, 03:45:25 PM
And, it is still way too soon for people to rage against those who may think that way. Same-sex couples raising children, historically speaking, is still a very very new thing. It's going to take some time for the majority to accept it.

We already have the majority accepting it.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/06/02/same-sex-adoption_n_5432841.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on September 16, 2016, 03:51:24 PM
Are you guys discounting the fact that a child is being raised by two faggots?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on September 16, 2016, 04:16:10 PM
You were raised with a father and a mother.  If you turned out this way with the best possible combination of parents, I shudder to think what you would be like in a single parent or gay household.  Patrick Bateman would look upon you with disgust.

Hahaha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on October 01, 2016, 05:53:47 AM
So Tommy how do you feel about human rights because Duterte thinks they're the antithesis of government

http://news.abs-cbn.com/news/09/30/16/duterte-human-rights-is-anti-thesis-of-government
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on October 01, 2016, 01:48:52 PM
http://news.abs-cbn.com/news/09/30/16/duterte-cites-hitler-id-be-happy-to-slaughter-3-million

I'm sure Hitler is currently saving space for him in hell.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 01, 2016, 05:00:10 PM
http://news.abs-cbn.com/news/09/30/16/duterte-cites-hitler-id-be-happy-to-slaughter-3-million

I'm sure Hitler is currently saving space for him in hell.

I know I'll get criticized for this, but be sounds more like a moron than evil.

Of course that's mostly semantics, so I'll stop there
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on October 01, 2016, 05:49:26 PM
I know I'll get criticized for this, but be sounds more like a moron than evil.

Of course that's mostly semantics, so I'll stop there

He's an evil moron.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 01, 2016, 10:21:21 PM
I don't know much about the Philippine government and how it works, but I can't imagine he has the power to do any of that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on October 01, 2016, 10:49:35 PM
I don't know much about the Philippine government and how it works, but I can't imagine he has the power to do any of that.

Over 2,000 people have died in the Philippines as a result of Duterte's war on drugs. He took office in May.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on October 01, 2016, 10:51:54 PM
Perhaps he won't be able to kill 3 million but it won't be for a lack of trying.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 01, 2016, 10:53:26 PM

Over 2,000 people have died in the Philippines as a result of Duterte's war on drugs. He took office in May.

Just looked it up. Not even counting the thousands he supposedly killed while fuckn mayor. Christ.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 01, 2016, 11:00:22 PM
How would you guys feel about his ideas (basically kill all the drug users/dealers) IF it drastically reduced crime in the Philippine, and led to them having one of the lowest crime rates in the world ?

Would the ends justify the means ?

Obviously its a fucked up situation. But you have to imagine that a lot of crime revolves around either people on drugs, people trying to get money for drugs, or somehow related to criminal organizations that make a large part of their money through drugs.


 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 01, 2016, 11:14:25 PM

How would you guys feel about his ideas (basically kill all the drug users/dealers) IF it drastically reduced crime in the Philippine, and led to them having one of the lowest crime rates in the world ?

Would the ends justify the means ?

Obviously its a fucked up situation. But you have to imagine that a lot of crime revolves around either people on drugs, people trying to get money for drugs, or somehow related to criminal organizations that make a large part of their money through drugs.

You're probably looking at a bloody overthrow of the government at some point then.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on October 01, 2016, 11:18:21 PM
Just looked it up. Not even counting the thousands he supposedly killed while fuckn mayor. Christ.

Though never proven, it's widely accepted that he commissioned death squads while mayor of Davao for over 20 years in order to "keep the peace."


Here's a wikipedia page on it if you're at all interested in reading about it (it's not long): https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Davao_Death_Squad

It's pretty disgusting.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on October 01, 2016, 11:31:15 PM
This man won the presidency in a (relative) landslide on a promise to crackdown on crime. Now people are getting killed indiscriminately in the streets by police and vigilantes. Due process has effectively been thrown out the window and dissidents (public officials, legislators, judges, etc.) are being accused of criminal involvement of their own so that they become targets.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 02, 2016, 01:20:03 AM
It's stuff like this that makes me want to call my parents and thank them for coming to this country in the late 70s.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on October 02, 2016, 07:50:54 PM
It's stuff like this that makes me want to call my parents and thank them for coming to this country in the late 70s.

You're first generation what?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 02, 2016, 07:58:56 PM
You're first generation what?

Kenyan
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on October 02, 2016, 10:05:19 PM
Kenyan

Only from the ankle down though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on October 03, 2016, 02:23:14 PM
Kenyan

Wow I finally found who I'm voting for

Tommy 2016!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 20, 2016, 10:34:38 PM
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/editorials/ct-obamacare-fail-health-care-insurance-medicine-0911-jm-20160909-story.html

http://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2016/07/28/overwhelming-evidence-that-obamacare-caused-premiums-to-increase-substantially/#323a01b46e3c

http://www.forbes.com/sites/simonconstable/2016/09/30/told-ya-youre-going-to-pay-for-obamacares-failures/#783d87bb538c

http://money.cnn.com/2016/10/15/news/economy/obamacare-premiums/index.html

Thanks Obama
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on October 20, 2016, 10:56:00 PM
So much better than a relatively small tax increase and never worrying about insurance again!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 24, 2016, 09:09:13 PM
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/62acdd911e4d44a5b855acf25122bd22/obama-administration-confirms-double-digit-premium-hikes

Prrrrrt
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 24, 2016, 10:06:23 PM
Shocker
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 27, 2016, 10:09:06 AM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=anNWYPfK2oU
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 27, 2016, 11:41:05 AM
http://bigstory.ap.org/article/62acdd911e4d44a5b855acf25122bd22/obama-administration-confirms-double-digit-premium-hikes

Prrrrrt

Having Obamacare implode right after his term ends shocker

Good thing Trump is gonna lose so the entire mess gets dumped on the left
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 27, 2016, 12:15:50 PM

Having Obamacare implode right after his term ends shocker

Good thing Trump is gonna lose so the entire mess gets dumped on the left

Doesn't Obamacare imploding help Trump? He's predicted it since day one of his campaign.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 27, 2016, 01:42:04 PM
Doesn't Obamacare imploding help Trump? He's predicted it since day one of his campaign.
The ACA is so shitty it makes both extremes look like better alternatives. Single payer and a completely unrestricted market would both be improvements.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 27, 2016, 02:11:17 PM
Doesn't Obamacare imploding help Trump? He's predicted it since day one of his campaign.

Help him do what? He's going to be out of politics in a few weeks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on October 27, 2016, 02:30:01 PM
My personal hope is that sometime in my lifetime the words healthcare and market are no longer uttered in the same sentence.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 27, 2016, 03:01:20 PM
It was always designed to fail so that the left could scream it was a half measure and drag us kicking and screaming into a single payer system. Which of course worked wonders for the VA.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 27, 2016, 07:00:34 PM
It was always designed to fail so that the left could scream it was a half measure and drag us kicking and screaming into a single payer system. Which of course worked wonders for the VA.

No
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 28, 2016, 10:24:22 AM
How the freak did the Bundy militia get acquiited of everything?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 28, 2016, 10:39:14 AM
How the freak did the Bundy militia get acquiited of everything?
According to angry FB posts, white privilege.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on October 28, 2016, 11:05:11 AM
How the freak did the Bundy militia get acquiited of everything?

jury nullification
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on October 28, 2016, 11:05:38 AM
How the freak did the Bundy militia get acquiited of everything?

also it's been reported that like 9/15 people involved were undercover government agents
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 29, 2016, 10:59:17 AM

According to angry FB posts, white privilege.

Pretty much kids too young to remember what happened in Waco.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 29, 2016, 11:16:06 AM
Pretty much kids too young to remember what happened in Waco.
Waco was fabricated by Russia in order to influence the US election. /s
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 29, 2016, 11:19:49 AM

Waco was fabricated by Russia in order to influence the US election. /s

It's kind of funny how she actually used that as a defense. "Hey emails showed that you and the DNC intentionally screwed Bernie."

"Those emails aren't what's important, it's how they got leaked! Russians!"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 13, 2017, 08:48:26 PM
I'm only here for junc's take on this story:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/13/capitol-building-to-remove-controversial-pigs-as-police-painting.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 13, 2017, 11:11:46 PM
I'm only here for junc's take on this story:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/13/capitol-building-to-remove-controversial-pigs-as-police-painting.html
A small victory in the war on the war on police.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 14, 2017, 07:12:43 AM

I'm only here for junc's take on this story:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/01/13/capitol-building-to-remove-controversial-pigs-as-police-painting.html

Wtf? How did that painting even making it into the Capitol?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 14, 2017, 09:30:11 AM
Wtf? How did that painting even making it into the Capitol?

I am with you on that. If I was in congress, I would spray lighter fluid on that piece of excrement and light that crap up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 25, 2017, 06:12:47 AM
Quote
The Democratic National Committee’s search for a new chair includes a candidate who says that it is her job to “shut other white people down” when they deny possessing racial prejudice.

Sally Boynton Brown, Idaho Democratic Party executive director, joined other candidates vying for the coveted job at a George Washington University forum in Washington, D.C., on Monday to make their case. Ms. Brown garnered a round a applause for her racially charged pitch to attendees.


“My job is to listen and be a voice, and my job is to shut other white people down when they want to interrupt,” Ms. Brown said, Fox News reported Tuesday. “My job is to shut other white people down when they want to say, ‘Oh no I’m not prejudiced, I’m a Democrat, I’m accepting.’ […] My job is to make sure that they get that they have privilege and until we shut our mouths and we listen to those people who don’t and we lift our people up so that we all have equity in this country … we’re not going to break through this.”

Finally, put an end to these racially priveledged democrats
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 25, 2017, 07:50:15 AM
Sounds like the DNC has finally learned their lesson from the last election.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 25, 2017, 08:49:38 AM
I wonder if in about 50 years us straight white guys will have to march in DC for our rights.

In before Puck says I'm not straight.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 25, 2017, 01:11:41 PM
Finally, put an end to these racially priveledged democrats
No thanks. I'm backing Ellison.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 25, 2017, 01:12:38 PM
I wonder if in about 50 years us straight white guys will have to march in DC for our rights.

In before Puck says he's queer like me.

Nah, carry on Bo.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 25, 2017, 06:45:46 PM
Wow. The Economist Intelligence Unit (not exactly a partisan outfit) downgraded the US from "full democracy" status to "flawed democracy" based upon the decline of trust in the political system.

http://www.businessinsider.com/economist-intelligence-unit-downgrades-united-states-to-flawed-democracy-2017-1

I think important to note (and why I put it in this thread rather than the Lyin' Don thread) is that they do not blame this on Donald Trump, but rather see his election as a function of the failing of the American system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 25, 2017, 07:11:13 PM
Wow. The Economist Intelligence Unit (not exactly a partisan outfit) downgraded the US from "full democracy" status to "flawed democracy" based upon the decline of trust in the political system.

http://www.businessinsider.com/economist-intelligence-unit-downgrades-united-states-to-flawed-democracy-2017-1

I think important to note (and why I put it in this thread rather than the Lyin' Don thread) is that they do not blame this on Donald Trump, but rather see his election as a function of the failing of the American system.

Haha The Economist is definitely not a non-partisan organization. I even interviewed at their research arm in 2006 and the majority of it was spent with the English MD complaining about Bush.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 25, 2017, 07:14:56 PM
Haha The Economist is definitely not a non-partisan organization. I even interviewed at their research arm in 2006 and the majority of it was spent with the English MD complaining about Bush.

Haha at the fact that you think a ten year old anecdote regarding a single individual who worked for a different part of the organisation is remotely relevant.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 25, 2017, 07:16:47 PM
Haha at the fact that you think a ten year old anecdote regarding a single individual who worked for a different part of the organisation is remotely relevant.

Haha. Hey at least I have some reason to feel they're non partisan. You just claimed as such just because. I read that rag periodically and it definitely isn't "non partisan".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 25, 2017, 07:23:04 PM
Haha. Hey at least I have some reason to feel they're non partisan. You just claimed as such just because. I read that rag periodically and it definitely isn't "non partisan".

I read it occasionally. As the site's self proclaimed expert on all things economics you'll be familiar with the fact that there are a number of schools of economic thought, many conflicting, and the magazine reflects that. The fact that you may be more an advocate of one or two ahead of others does not make the publication partisan.

The fact that Congress has consistently over the last eight years polled at record low levels of satisfaction and trustworthiness should probably speak to the conclusion of this report.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 25, 2017, 07:25:16 PM
I read it occasionally. As the site's self proclaimed expert on all things economics you'll be familiar with the fact that there are a number of schools of economic thought, many conflicting, and the magazine reflects that. The fact that you may be more an advocate of one or two ahead of others does not make the publication partisan.

The fact that Congress has consistently over the last eight years polled at record low levels of satisfaction and trustworthiness should probably speak to the conclusion of this report.

I'll have to look closer as to how they did their ratings, but if they did it based on public opinion then of course we'd get a "flawed" rating. We're split in half essentially.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 25, 2017, 07:26:17 PM
I'll have to look closer as to how they did their ratings, but if they did it based on public opinion then of course we'd get a "flawed" rating. We're split in half essentially.

Congress approval ratings were somewhere round the 20s a year ago, as I recall.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 25, 2017, 07:31:00 PM
Congress approval ratings were somewhere round the 20s a year ago, as I recall.

And that's crazy because as divided as we are you'd think that the people actually elected to represent the public would at least collectively get 50pct or more depending on who's in charge. 20pct means that the public believes congress is completely ineffective as a branch of government.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 28, 2017, 08:51:50 PM
https://theintercept.com/2017/01/23/14-senate-democrats-fall-in-line-behind-trump-cia-pick-who-left-door-open-to-torture/

The Democrats who voted to confirm Pompeo were:

Joe Donnelly of Indiana
Dianne Feinstein of California
Maggie Hassan of New Hampshire
Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota
Tim Kaine of Virginia
Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota
Joe Manchin of West Virginia
Claire McCaskill of Missouri
Jack Reed of Rhode Island
Brian Schatz of Hawaii
Chuck Schumer of New York
Jeanne Shaheen of New Hampshire
Mark Warner of Virginia
Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island

Sen. Rand Paul, R-Ky., was the lone member of his party to vote against his confirmation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on January 29, 2017, 08:16:26 AM
Chuck Schumer is a surprise.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 29, 2017, 08:49:46 AM
Chuck Schumer is a surprise.
Not really. He's a stooge.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on February 01, 2017, 03:56:47 AM
I love The Economist and it's far from "partisan". 

And who wasn't making fun of Bush in 2006?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 01, 2017, 07:20:09 AM
I love The Economist and it's far from "partisan". 

And who wasn't making fun of Bush in 2006?

I used to read it regularly, but haven't in a while. Found out they have a new editor in chief. The one before her was a pretty vocal critic of conservatism. I guess it's changed a bit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 01, 2017, 07:22:57 AM
I'm officially burned out on politics.  I don't know how people can make a career of this excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 01, 2017, 09:56:51 AM
Quote
Comedian Bill Burr has a simpler explanation for Clinton’s defeat, which he laid out on Conan Monday night.

“I’m sick of people making excuses for her. She blew it,” Burr said, to stunned silence from the audience. “See that? Nobody thinks that, but she blew it. Listen, she lost to a guy who said three things a week that would torpedo anyone else’s campaign. How do you do that? It’s like playing a football game where the other team throws 20 interceptions, and you still figure out how to blow it. At what point do you take responsibility?”

I think Hillary Clinton is the Jets?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 01, 2017, 10:01:17 AM
I think Hillary Clinton is the Jets?

But she won the popular vote!

I'm sick of that argument. It's like a team losing 14-10, but led the game in time of possession, first downs, and total yards and their fans blaming the winning team.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 01, 2017, 10:13:05 AM
But she won the popular vote!

I'm sick of that argument. It's like a team losing 14-10, but led the game in time of possession, first downs, and total yards and their fans blaming the winning team.

Not really. It's more like a game finishing 14-10, but the W being awarded to the team with 10 points because they had more first downs. You can make an argument that both teams knew before kick off that the stat that mattered was first downs and not scoreline, but the not unreasonable complaint is that knowing the rules of the game doesn't change the fact that they don't make sense.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 01, 2017, 10:34:54 AM
Not really. It's more like a game finishing 14-10, but the W being awarded to the team with 10 points because they had more first downs. You can make an argument that both teams knew before kick off that the stat that mattered was first downs and not scoreline, but the not unreasonable complaint is that knowing the rules of the game doesn't change the fact that they don't make sense.

But the electoral count IS the score. Your analogy doesn't work because there would be no point in having endzones or even a score if it didn't matter.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 01, 2017, 11:10:34 AM
But the electoral count IS the score. Your analogy doesn't work because there would be no point in having endzones or even a score if it didn't matter.

There would be no point in recording first downs or yardage gained if it didn't matter, but we still do.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 01, 2017, 11:13:44 AM
There would be no point in recording first downs or yardage gained if it didn't matter, but we still do.

They don't matter. An nfl game comes down to the score. Hillary Clinton was the one who got more yards and first downs, but Trump scored more points so be gets the W. And now people are bitching that Hillary Clinton deserves to win because she outplayed Trump up and down, and he still walked away with more points
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 01, 2017, 11:17:41 AM
They don't matter. An nfl game comes down to the score. Hillary Clinton was the one who got more yards and first downs, but Trump scored more points so be gets the W.

No, see, you're still working with Tommy's flawed interpretation. The score in a football game makes sense. It's the point of the game. It's the logical criterion on which to judge a game.

The US political system, and the British and Canadian ones for that matter, is massively flawed. One man one vote is a lost principle in our current systems - right now your vote (and mine, for that matter) is worth far, far less than that of someone in a small handful of select battlegrounds. To use Tommy's flawed analogy, your game doesn't hand the W to the team that scores the most points, it's handing it to the team that wins some other far more esoteric statistical battle. It's broken democracy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on February 01, 2017, 11:19:30 AM
A better analogy would be Trump winning three out of four quarters of a football game by less than 7 points each, while Clinton won one quarter by 21 points. Clinton ends with more points overall, but Trump won more quarters, so won the game.

They both knew that whoever won more quarters would win the game, but the final score still had Clinton ahead by a few points.

That being said, that is no excuse for how she strategized, nor for her weakness as a candidate. She was widely disliked, for many valid reasons, and put far too much weight in optimistic polls.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 01, 2017, 08:22:41 PM
No, see, you're still working with Tommy's flawed interpretation. The score in a football game makes sense. It's the point of the game. It's the logical criterion on which to judge a game.

The US political system, and the British and Canadian ones for that matter, is massively flawed. One man one vote is a lost principle in our current systems - right now your vote (and mine, for that matter) is worth far, far less than that of someone in a small handful of select battlegrounds. To use Tommy's flawed analogy, your game doesn't hand the W to the team that scores the most points, it's handing it to the team that wins some other far more esoteric statistical battle. It's broken democracy.

Maybe so but what's the alternative?

Both Republicans and Democrats are shitty, and even tho you're a left wing guy you surely won't argue if the US was a one party country  it would be better. Contrast is a good thing to keep these excrement heads in check on  both sides

And that's basically what it would be without the electoral college. Candidates would cater to a handful of major cities, while ignoring the rest if the country
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 01, 2017, 08:29:08 PM
Maybe so but what's the alternative?

Both Republicans and Democrats are shitty, and even tho you're a left wing guy you surely won't argue it the US was a one party country

And that's basically what it would be without the electoral college. Candidates would cater to a handful of major cities, while ignoring the rest if the country

Well until 1856 only white male property owners were allowed to vote, so the common folk in the big cities didn't really have a say. It was mostly landowners outside the cities.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 01, 2017, 08:31:04 PM
Maybe so but what's the alternative?

Both Republicans and Democrats are shitty, and even tho you're a left wing guy you surely won't argue it the US was a one party country

And that's basically what it would be without the electoral college. Candidates would cater to a handful of major cities, while ignoring the rest if the country

No. The cities narrative is bullshit.

1 person should = 1 vote. It doesn't matter if they live in the same city, neighborhood, block, or share one studio apartment on the Lower East Side.

At this point the electoral college is indistinguishable from affirmative action for red states.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 01, 2017, 08:32:31 PM
No. The cities narrative is bullshit.

1 person should = 1 vote. It doesn't matter if they live in the same city, neighborhood, block, or share one studio apartment on the Lower East Side.

At this point the electoral college is indistinguishable from affirmative action for red states.

I thought you guys were in favor of affirmative action ?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 01, 2017, 08:44:41 PM
Meh I have no interest in arguing that nonsense

Making an argument for the popular vote is perfectly reasonable.

The biggest problem is most voters Democrat and Republican are ignorant freaking morons who have no understanding of anything which is why every year you get the same exact freaking excrement and corruption from both parties.

I'd rather have the people vote on highly educated intelligent representatives on a state by state basis then have them hold an election for the entirety electoral proceeds, as they would have the education, and time to thoroughly vet and understand each candidate as well as have an in depth understanding of the issues.

I realize it's not "democratic"  but the average American voter might as well be drooling and banging their ahead against the wall, the way our elections are held might is a process of extreme ignorance
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 01, 2017, 09:06:23 PM
I thought you guys were in favor of affirmative action ?

I'm in favor of things that benefit me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 01, 2017, 09:12:58 PM
I'm in favor of things that benefit me.

Why do you think a Hillary presidency would benefit you more?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 01, 2017, 09:28:39 PM
Why do you think a Hillary presidency would benefit you more?

Don't be obtuse.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 01, 2017, 09:43:41 PM
http://m.sfgate.com/news/article/Protesters-storm-Milo-Yiannopoulos-event-at-UC-10901829.php

Columbia can invite Ahmadinejad to speak freely at their campus but an American with dissenting opinions can't speak without violent protests.

Okay.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on February 01, 2017, 09:44:48 PM
Maybe so but what's the alternative?

An end to fptp as well as an end to the electoral college. National multi-day voting.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on February 01, 2017, 11:32:36 PM
(http://i.imgur.com/RLJeJhW.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 02, 2017, 07:15:50 AM


http://m.sfgate.com/news/article/Protesters-storm-Milo-Yiannopoulos-event-at-UC-10901829.php

Columbia can invite Ahmadinejad to speak freely at their campus but a Greek-born British citizen with dissenting opinions can't speak without violent protests.

Okay.

FTFY
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 02, 2017, 07:20:11 AM

FTFY

Thanks. Didn't realize I wore "American". I've seen some of his stuff and it's mostly anti-PC culture stuff, but you have to be on the far fringes of the left when you riot over a gay Jewish conservative. I know those idiots don't all represent the left, but they basically proved his message without having to say anything.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 02, 2017, 09:20:50 AM
But she won the popular vote!

I'm sick of that argument. It's like a team losing 14-10, but led the game in time of possession, first downs, and total yards and their fans blaming the winning team.
Terrible analogy.  I think the tuck rule would describe this election better.

From gerrymandering to voter suppression, the republicans are the Patriots.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 02, 2017, 10:26:40 AM
Terrible analogy.  I think the tuck rule would describe this election better.

From gerrymandering to voter suppression, the republicans are the Patriots.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

"Voter suppression."

The idea that minorities and the underprivileged are so retarded that they can't obtain an ID is freaking hilarious.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 02, 2017, 10:34:37 AM
"Voter suppression."

The idea that minorities and the underprivileged are so retarded that they can't obtain an ID is freaking hilarious.

I just don't understand how people think that voter fraud isn't a thing, despite the fact that needing a freaking license is considered too much
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 02, 2017, 11:07:47 AM
I just don't understand how people think that voter fraud isn't a thing, despite the fact that needing a freaking license is considered too much

It's insane. I could easily register my family and extended family and spend the entire day just voting for every single one of them.

Also, isn't it a bit insulting to minorities to suggest that they either don't know how, or don't have the time to obtain a driver's license or government issued ID?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 02, 2017, 11:11:10 AM
"Voter suppression."

The idea that minorities and the underprivileged are so retarded that they can't obtain an ID is freaking hilarious.

Take a day off work to PAY for an ID to participate in your RIGHT to vote.  Then, take another day off work to go wait in line for hours to vote, and PAY the bus fare to go 30 miles further than you did in the last election.

And if you are a student at a university in a red state, you are basically just fucked.

Yeah, voter suppression isn't a thing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 02, 2017, 11:17:29 AM
It's insane. I could easily register my family and extended family and spend the entire day just voting for every single one of them.

Also, isn't it a bit insulting to minorities to suggest that they either don't know how, or don't have the time to obtain a driver's license or government issued ID?

Wow.  Let's parse this out...

Because you have money, you could register your entire extended family and vote on their behalf.  No problems there.  SMH

People that do not have money to burn cannot take days off work to participate in the process.  Just because they are not as fortunate as you doesn't change the fact that they have the right to vote.  You used to just have to go down the street, sign your name, and vote.  Oh wait, that's exactly what I do every November and it take 5 minutes.  No ID.  No lines.  No BS.  If this doesn't resonate, I have no freaking idea what the tell you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 02, 2017, 11:17:50 AM
Take a day off work to PAY for an ID to participate in your RIGHT to vote.  Then, take another day off work to go wait in line for hours to vote, and PAY the bus fare to go 30 miles further than you did in the last election.

And if you are a student at a university in a red state, you are basically just fucked.

Yeah, voter suppression isn't a thing.

How do you even get a job without proper identification? Also, employers are required to give each employee time off to vote. If they decide to use that time to go home early instead of voting then that's their problem (I've seen plenty of people do this).

How are students fucked? If you come from a red state you most likely have been driving since the age of 16 so it's reasonable to assume you have a license. And even if you don't have a car, you can vote by mail, or take a bus to whatever polling station is around you.

I honestly can't see how anyone can say that it is difficult to vote in this country.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 02, 2017, 11:19:59 AM
Wow.  Let's parse this out...

Because you have money, you could register your entire extended family and vote on their behalf.  No problems there.  SMH

People that do not have money to burn cannot take days off work to participate in the process.  Just because they are not as fortunate as you doesn't change the fact that they have the right to vote.  You used to just have to go down the street, sign your name, and vote.  Oh wait, that's exactly what I do every November and it take 5 minutes.  No ID.  No lines.  No BS.  If this doesn't resonate, I have no freaking idea what the tell you.

I can take my iPad, go door to door in poor neighborhoods in California or wherever, and register people online. Then I can just hire some kids to pretend they're "so and so" to stand on line and vote. It's really not that difficult to commit voter fraud.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 02, 2017, 11:21:56 AM
How do you even get a job without proper identification? Also, employers are required to give each employee time off to vote. If they decide to use that time to go home early instead of voting then that's their problem (I've seen plenty of people do this).

How are students fucked? If you come from a red state you most likely have been driving since the age of 16 so it's reasonable to assume you have a license. And even if you don't have a car, you can vote by mail, or take a bus to whatever polling station is around you.

I honestly can't see how anyone can say that it is difficult to vote in this country.

As a white male living in a nice area, I do not need an ID, I do not need to wait in line, etc.  It should be the same for any color person living in a shitty area.  There is a registry, you sign your name, you vote.  Done.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 02, 2017, 11:23:09 AM
As a white male living in a nice area, I do not need an ID, I do not need to wait in line, etc.  It should be the same for any color person living in a shitty area.  There is a registry, you sign your name, you vote.  Done.

You SHOULD need ID even as a white man. What's to stop you from just registering a bunch of poor people and voting on their behalf?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 02, 2017, 11:23:16 AM
I can take my iPad, go door to door in poor neighborhoods in California or wherever, and register people online. Then I can just hire some kids to pretend they're "so and so" to stand on line and vote. It's really not that difficult to commit voter fraud.

No.  If you are in a poor neighborhood you will need ID.  Do you even compare your posts to check your hypocrisy?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 02, 2017, 11:23:24 AM
Best political analyst name:  Dan Balz
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 02, 2017, 11:25:22 AM
You SHOULD need ID even as a white man. What's to stop you from just registering a bunch of poor people and voting on their behalf?

I have never needed ID in my lifetime of voting.  I tell them my name, they find me in the big book, and I sign my name.  Crazy that they have a copy of my signature on file from when I was 20.  It looks completely different now, but they don't care.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 02, 2017, 11:26:09 AM
No.  If you are in a poor neighborhood you will need ID.  Do you even compare your posts to check your hypocrisy?

Really? So states have different voting laws based on district? Silly  me, I thought communities register to vote with their STATE and not community board.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 02, 2017, 11:26:34 AM
Best political analyst name:  Dan Balz

Dude needs to be a Democratic senator.

Dem Balz of New York has the floor.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 02, 2017, 11:26:57 AM
I have never needed ID in my lifetime of voting.  I tell them my name, they find me in the big book, and I sign my name.  Crazy that they have a copy of my signature on file from when I was 20.  It looks completely different now, but they don't care.

They SHOULD care. That's the same for me. My signature from when I was 18. I saw my parents and brother on there, too, so I could easily have gone back and voted for all of them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 02, 2017, 11:28:40 AM
Really? So states have different voting laws based on district? Silly  me, I thought communities register to vote with their STATE and not community board.

Well...  You need ID in North Las Vegas.  You also get to wait on 2 hour lines.  North Las Vegas is ShiPa Town.  Figure it out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 02, 2017, 11:32:51 AM
They SHOULD care. That's the same for me. My signature from when I was 18. I saw my parents and brother on there, too, so I could easily have gone back and voted for all of them.

You understand that I am just asking for consistency, right?  I am all for some form of voter ID, if it is FREE, EASY and consistently applied.  The republicans also need to stop shutting down voting sites in inner city and university areas of red states.  Nobody should have to wait 2 hours to vote.  Nobody should have to travel dozens of miles to vote.

It will never happen though, because republicans would get annihilated in every popular vote nationwide.  Hence, voter suppression.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 02, 2017, 11:39:11 AM
You understand that I am just asking for consistency, right?  I am all for some form of voter ID, if it is FREE, EASY and consistently applied.  The republicans also need to stop shutting down voting sites in inner city and university areas of red states.  Nobody should have to wait 2 hours to vote.  Nobody should have to travel dozens of miles to vote.

It will never happen though, because republicans would get annihilated in every popular vote nationwide.  Hence, voter suppression.

I vote in my hometwon (UES Manhattan), one of the richest zipcodes in America, and had to wait about an hour and a half to vote. Also, getting your ID isn't very difficult. Walk into the DMV with $40, proof of address and your birth certificate, and you're done.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 02, 2017, 11:48:05 AM
I vote in my hometwon (UES Manhattan), one of the richest zipcodes in America, and had to wait about an hour and a half to vote.

Fair enough point.  That is still beyond insane, but I guess it makes sense.  It would make more sense to have more polling stations, obviously.

Also, getting your ID isn't very difficult. Walk into the DMV with $40, proof of address and your birth certificate, and you're done.

Take the day off work.  Take the bus to the DMV with money you don't have because you took the day off work.  Pay for an ID with money you don't have because you took the day off work.  Then take the day off work.  Take the bus to the polling station with money you don't have because you took the day off work.  Be lucky to still have a job when you get back.  And by the way, no, it is not required that employers give you time off to vote.  In a 'right to work' state, they can just fire you for voting.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 02, 2017, 12:01:52 PM
Fair enough point.  That is still beyond insane, but I guess it makes sense.  It would make more sense to have more polling stations, obviously.

Take the day off work.  Take the bus to the DMV with money you don't have because you took the day off work.  Pay for an ID with money you don't have because you took the day off work.  Then take the day off work.  Take the bus to the polling station with money you don't have because you took the day off work.  Be lucky to still have a job when you get back.  And by the way, no, it is not required that employers give you time off to vote.  In a 'right to work' state, they can just fire you for voting.

I agree that it should be easier to vote and obtain an ID. I remember it taking me months to get a new birth certificate before I could get my learner's permit back in H.S. It's both a state, local, and federal problem. I believe every state should have voter ID laws and every state should allow their employees to take time off to vote (or even make it a public holiday).

But why are you assuming that the only ones being affected by this are poor minorities? What about poor white people who live in rural areas? You're assuming that it's only difficult for some groups and not all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on February 02, 2017, 12:03:56 PM
Best political analyst name:  Dan Balz

Dan Balz looks exactly how I expected him to look.

Glorious.

And Hillary Clinton lost the election because she's the least likeable candidate in the past 50 years. She's an insufferable robot who inspires nothing in the american populace. The Podesta emails were the cherry on top to prove that she needed all the help in the world to win, including her camp requesting the 24/7 media outlets to shift public opinion towards Trump and Cruz because she thought those were her easiest opponents. Not to mention the "polling" that was conducted were essentially the Dems own version of alternative facts, thanks to the media being in lockstep with her campaign.

To help these analogies you guys were using:

She's like Tom Brady, who also got caught cheating, but she actually lost. Unlike that queynte's queynte of all cunts.

Voter Fraud is overrated, and is a dog whistle issue.

Hopefully these 4 years cleanse the extreme ideals on both sides and people start compromising and agreeing with one another. This sports team nonsense with politics needs to end. Faggots. All of us.

I hope Jill Stein and Bernie Sanders puff out a baby girl that fucks Barron Trump when they're old enough and that kid - that kid is going to be the Messiah.

freak this noise.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 02, 2017, 12:18:48 PM
I agree that it should be easier to vote and obtain an ID. I remember it taking me months to get a new birth certificate before I could get my learner's permit back in H.S. It's both a state, local, and federal problem. I believe every state should have voter ID laws and every state should allow their employees to take time off to vote (or even make it a public holiday).

On this I think we have common ground.

But why are you assuming that the only ones being affected by this are poor minorities? What about poor white people who live in rural areas? You're assuming that it's only difficult for some groups and not all.

They generally can just go to town and vote at the school or church, with no lines, and no ID required.  The more rural you are, the easier it is to vote.  This is intentional and not arguable.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 02, 2017, 12:43:36 PM
But why are you assuming that the only ones being affected by this are poor minorities? What about poor white people who live in rural areas? You're assuming that it's only difficult for some groups and not all.

Because the voter id laws aren't uniform
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Mehta Source on February 02, 2017, 01:01:30 PM
Quote from: NDMick
And Hillary Clinton lost the election because she's the least likeable candidate in the past 50 years.(...)

The Popular Vote argument is useless when we talk about who won and who lost, but it surely is valid in here: Trump's even LESS likeable than her.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 02, 2017, 01:35:40 PM
In 2012, I waited in line over six hours to vote in a good neighborhood. If there's a will there's a way. I had to show ID.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 02, 2017, 03:33:52 PM
In 2012, I waited in line over six hours to vote in a good neighborhood. If there's a will there's a way. I had to show ID.
#Florida
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 02, 2017, 03:47:48 PM
You can vote a week or so before the actual election up here.  No lineups, no fuss.

#winning
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 02, 2017, 04:08:10 PM
I did an absentee ballot this time around
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 02, 2017, 04:44:11 PM
You can vote a week or so before the actual election up here.  No lineups, no fuss.

#winning

Which got you that bundle of sticks Justin Trudeau.

#notwinning
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 02, 2017, 04:45:45 PM
I did absentee, easy as excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on February 02, 2017, 07:15:43 PM
Which got you that bundle of sticks Justin Trudeau.

#notwinning

Someone's salty.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 02, 2017, 07:37:34 PM
Which got you that bundle of sticks Justin Trudeau.

#notwinning
your lack of awareness is astounding.

You really should be some random Sociology major's thesis subject.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 07, 2017, 02:29:26 PM
I try to keep an open mind about things, and admittedly I'm no expert (my favorite line to use on this website), but I don't see a whole lot of good coming from Betsy DeVos being the Secretary of Education.  I try to read about a redeeming quality for her, and the only thing I can find is that she's good at raising money.  I'm not going to sit here and say that I agree or disagree with everything the Trump administration has done so far, but this one is a bit of a head scratcher. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 07, 2017, 02:58:38 PM
I try to keep an open mind about things, and admittedly I'm no expert (my favorite line to use on this website), but I don't see a whole lot of good coming from Betsy DeVos being the Secretary of Education.  I try to read about a redeeming quality for her, and the only thing I can find is that she's good at raising money.  I'm not going to sit here and say that I agree or disagree with everything the Trump administration has done so far, but this one is a bit of a head scratcher. 

I'm a big Betsy fan because everyone else hates her
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 07, 2017, 03:04:44 PM
I'm a big Betsy fan because everyone else hates her

I guess Trump liked her because she's a free market person regarding education.  Again, I'm no expert.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 07, 2017, 03:08:09 PM
NBTG
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 07, 2017, 03:08:50 PM
NBTG

No boobs, tight gunt?  That's sexist brutha!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 07, 2017, 03:09:31 PM
I guess Trump liked her because she's a free market person regarding education.  Again, I'm no expert.

Our public education system is excrement so it could use a shakeup. That's the only reason why I support the pick. But I also don't know much about the subject, just that whatever we've been doing for the last 50 years clearly hasn't been working.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 07, 2017, 03:10:33 PM
Our public education system is excrement so it could use a shakeup. That's the only reason why I support the pick. But I also don't know much about the subject, just that whatever we've been doing for the last 50 years clearly hasn't been working.

It could get worse.  I just hope it doesn't devolve into a similar version of the for-profit shitstorm that lined the pockets of executives via student loans for useless degrees.  I hope it doesn't become a business where profit and salary are priority.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 07, 2017, 03:10:40 PM
I'm a big Betsy fan because everyone else hates her

Also you don't have any children.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 07, 2017, 03:15:37 PM
Also you don't have any children.

that he knows about.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 07, 2017, 03:17:33 PM
that he knows about.

Somewhere in NY there is a child that can yell way louder than his classmates.  He also has a man bun.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 07, 2017, 03:21:46 PM
^ haha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on February 07, 2017, 04:30:16 PM
US education is in fact in need of many reforms but that does not mean you hire any old POS to this position simply for the sake of shaking things up
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 07, 2017, 04:36:03 PM
US education is in fact in need of many reforms but that does not mean you hire any old POS to this position simply for the sake of shaking things up

This is what it has come to. dcm as the voice of reason.

We're all doomed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 07, 2017, 04:40:20 PM
Hahahahahah ooooof
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on February 07, 2017, 04:44:40 PM
This is what it has come to. dcm as the voice of reason.

We're all doomed.

i am not dcm, dcm is a nurse
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 07, 2017, 05:46:58 PM
This is what it has come to. dcm as the voice of reason.

We're all doomed.

So d swordz is really DCM? That's disappointing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 07, 2017, 10:55:46 PM
Education is an area in which I wouldn't mind seeing a decreased federal role in exchange for strengthened state control, but unfortunately it does mean saying "not my problem" when some pooper state decides to slash their education budget.

It's something left over from when I used to lean more libertarian. Most libertarian stances can be reduced down to:

-"Not my problem"

and/or

-"The free market will fix it" (Maybe it will, maybe it won't, but as long as you believe that's all that matters!)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 08, 2017, 10:57:49 AM
The biggest problem is that education has been a political tether ball.  Like health care, politicizing either fucks everything up.

There is common ground.  Put a gun to any politicians head and they will agree that free healthcare and education should be a right, and that the money needed to fix it is right there in the bloated military budget.  But they cannot say that, so for now neither is getting fixed.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 08, 2017, 08:40:43 PM
The far right loonies will dismiss this because HuffPo, but this is actually a very well written and balanced article.

http://huff.to/2lpkgKE
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 13, 2017, 11:19:38 AM
"Seattle, for example passed a “gender rule,” that says men and women who claim to be the opposite of that can use any bathroom they want, and can’t be discriminated against.

Seattle Parks and Recreation is facing a first-of-a-kind challenge to gender bathroom rules. A man undressed in a women’s locker room, citing a new state rule that allows people to choose a bathroom based on gender identity.
It was a busy time at Evans Pool around 5:30pm Monday February 8. The pool was open for lap swim. According to Seattle Parks and Recreation, a man wearing board shorts entered the women’s locker room and took off his shirt. Women alerted staff, who told the man to leave, but he said “the law has changed and I have a right to be here.

As far as policy to protect everyone, Seattle Parks spokesman David Takami says they’re still working on the issue. Right now, there’s no specific protocol for how someone should demonstrate their gender in order to access a bathroom."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 13, 2017, 11:30:26 AM
I'm glad people who get worked up about this have solved all of America's other problems.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 13, 2017, 11:37:34 AM
I'm glad people who get worked up about this have solved all of America's other problems.
Right?  Of the list of things I give a excrement about, this is...  Not on the list.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 13, 2017, 11:42:49 AM
I don't want to see a chick take a dump.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 13, 2017, 12:31:12 PM
I identify as a lesbian black woman
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 13, 2017, 01:09:18 PM
I'm glad people who get worked up about this have solved all of America's other problems.

What I don't get is that people are so focused on the feelings of the transgender person, and not 99.9% of women who use the bathroom who probably don't want some guy who thinks he's a woman in there with them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 13, 2017, 02:12:43 PM
What I don't get is that people are so focused on the feelings of the transgender person, and not 99.9% of women who use the bathroom who probably don't want some guy who thinks he's a woman in there with them.
Best part is there is no way to enforce it. If I tell people I identify as a woman even though I'm clearly a guy how will they contest it? This nonsense gives a free pass to weirdos who want to enter women's bathrooms under false pretenses
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on February 13, 2017, 02:14:59 PM
What I don't get is that people are so focused on the feelings of the transgender person, and not 99.9% of women who use the bathroom who probably don't want some guy who thinks he's a woman in there with them.

Assuming the tranny is done up to look like a chick I don't get how anyone is paying enough attention to notice to begin with. Do chicks not follow the no eye contact, no talking rule? Plus they all have their own stall.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 13, 2017, 02:20:21 PM
Best part is there is no way to enforce it. If I tell people I identify as a woman even though I'm clearly a guy how will they contest it? This nonsense gives a free pass to weirdos who want to enter women's bathrooms under false pretenses

That's what people seem to be missing. They're so focused on the social justice aspect of it that they're forgetting that the majority of people probably don't want this to happen. I doubt most guys would care if a chick who claims to be a guy uses the men's room, but women's locker rooms, girls' locker rooms, etc. You get called a bigot if you're against it, but it's not a completely unreasonable position to have.

Doesn't affect me, but I can at least understand why some people are against it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 13, 2017, 02:24:21 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170213/4ca619a75916801a1a554fd7b2142300.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on February 13, 2017, 02:26:18 PM
That's what people seem to be missing. They're so focused on the social justice aspect of it that they're forgetting that the majority of people probably don't want this to happen. I doubt most guys would care if a chick who claims to be a guy uses the men's room, but women's locker rooms, girls' locker rooms, etc. You get called a bigot if you're against it, but it's not a completely unreasonable position to have.

Doesn't affect me, but I can at least understand why some people are against it.

Being the father of a little girl who will at some point be using those bathrooms I just don't see that being the thing that will expose her to weird perverts. Listening to stories of women and their run ins with creeps and weirdos they are dealing with that stuff at any social gathering where they can be engaged in a conversation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 13, 2017, 02:32:50 PM
I guess at some point the only solution is single-person unisex shitters in all public places.  If I were an entrepreneur, I'd get busy designing small, cheap, single-person, unisex bathroom designs for businesses and public buildings. Basically portapotties, but inside and nicer with running water.

 Profit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 13, 2017, 02:38:00 PM
The far right loonies will dismiss this because HuffPo, but this is actually a very well written and balanced article.

http://huff.to/2lpkgKE

I did t read the entire thing, but it's hard to tell if it's truly a movement, or just people who hate and or afraid of Trump.

I think its a near certainty republics s are going to get absolutely annihilated in the midterm election, and Democrats will sweep the board (if not a full fledged super majority) at the end of Trumps first term

The question just becomes whether it's something that continues and grows from there or was just an anti Trump anamoly
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 13, 2017, 02:51:12 PM
I guess at some point the only solution is single-person unisex shitters in all public places.  If I were an entrepreneur, I'd get busy designing small, cheap, single-person, unisex bathroom designs for businesses and public buildings. Basically portapotties, but inside and nicer with running water.

 Profit.


How about unisex bathrooms with no urinals and just a bunch of stalls? They have plenty of those in lounges and clubs here in the city. A communal sink and everyone just waits for a stall.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 13, 2017, 04:16:28 PM
How about unisex bathrooms with no urinals and just a bunch of stalls? They have plenty of those in lounges and clubs here in the city. A communal sink and everyone just waits for a stall.
freak that.  No stalls or toilets.  Every bathroom contains only the trough.  That was we are all equally fucked if we have to take a dump.  Girls will just have to learn to pee standing up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 13, 2017, 04:28:06 PM
Best part is there is no way to enforce it. If I tell people I identify as a woman even though I'm clearly a guy how will they contest it? This nonsense gives a free pass to weirdos who want to enter women's bathrooms under false pretenses
Good thing there are never any weird women in women's bathrooms.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 13, 2017, 04:32:28 PM
Good thing there are never any weird women in women's bathrooms.
There is a huge physical difference between men and women.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 13, 2017, 04:37:00 PM
There is a huge physical difference between men and women.
According to my son, it's that women have a front butt.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 13, 2017, 04:44:13 PM
I did t read the entire thing, but it's hard to tell if it's truly a movement, or just people who hate and or afraid of Trump.

I think its a near certainty republics s are going to get absolutely annihilated in the midterm election, and Democrats will sweep the board (if not a full fledged super majority) at the end of Trumps first term

The question just becomes whether it's something that continues and grows from there or was just an anti Trump anamoly
Don't underestimate the DNC's ability to freak this up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 13, 2017, 04:46:35 PM
Don't underestimate the DNC's ability to freak this up.

Pretty much the only way it doesn't happen is if the DNC blows up several times worse than the Clinton campaigns failure, or if Trump hits a grand slam when it comes to the economy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 13, 2017, 05:02:44 PM
There is a huge physical difference between men and women.
Also a huge physical difference between adults and children.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 13, 2017, 05:12:21 PM
Pretty much the only way it doesn't happen is if the DNC blows up several times worse than the Clinton campaigns failure, or if Trump hits a grand slam when it comes to the economy

I'm trying to wrap my head around how you're so certain the Democrats will sweep the elections in 2 years mere months after everyone predicted just that and the opposite happened.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 13, 2017, 05:14:53 PM
I'm trying to wrap my head around how you're so certain the Democrats will sweep the elections in 2 years mere months after everyone predicted just that and the opposite happened.

Have you turned on a TV or read the news? Trump won because Hillary Clinton was buried in scandal and her negatives were so high. After 4 years of Trump acting the way he currently is, his negatives will be legendary.

The economy could be his only saving grace
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on February 13, 2017, 05:22:06 PM
Have you turned on a TV or read the news? Trump won because Hillary Clinton was buried in scandal and her negatives were so high. After 4 years of Trump acting the way he currently is, his negatives will be legendary.

The economy could be his only saving grace

That's all #fakenews that told you Hillary was going to win.

/Trump logic
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 13, 2017, 05:34:13 PM
Have you turned on a TV or read the news? Trump won because Hillary Clinton was buried in scandal and her negatives were so high. After 4 years of Trump acting the way he currently is, his negatives will be legendary.

The economy could be his only saving grace

Trump's negatives weren't high? He wasn't buried in scandal after scandal? Come on, you're better than this. It hasn't even been a full month and aside from the messy travel ban rollout, there really isn't much for the people who voted for Trump to change course. Why would they? He's doing, or at least trying, everything he pledged to do on the campaign trail for better or worse.

Also, the economy and national security were two of the biggest issues that decided the election. He's gung-ho on both. The travel ban and wall may be controversial, but many business leaders across the country have already publicly stated that his proposed economic policies will be good for the economy and future business prospects.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 13, 2017, 05:36:29 PM
Trump's negatives weren't high? He wasn't buried in scandal after scandal? Come on, you're better than this. It hasn't even been a full month and aside from the messy travel ban rollout, there really isn't much for the people who voted for Trump to change course. Why would they? He's doing, or at least trying, everything he pledged to do on the campaign trail for better or worse.

Also, the economy and national security were two of the biggest issues that decided the election. He's gung-ho on both. The travel ban and wall may be controversial, but many business leaders across the country have already publicly stated that his proposed economic policies will be good for the economy and future business prospects.

Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million when he was a relative unknown, with only a few months to say and do really stupid excrement.

He's been in office a month, and it's been non stop stupid excrement on his end. I think Trump could really do good things with the economy

But when he opens his mouth he looks like a completely freaking idiot

Not to mention  coming into his first term he's had the greatest negatives of any president ever
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 13, 2017, 05:42:26 PM
Trump lost the popular vote by 3 million when he was a relative unknown, with only a few months to say and do really stupid excrement.

He's been in office a month, and it's been non stop stupid excrement on his end. I think Trump could really do good things with the economy

But when he opens his mouth he looks like a completely freaking idiot

Not to mention  coming into his first term he's had the greatest negatives of any president ever

It's all about the economy and campaign promises. Bush lost the popular vote, started an unpopular war, and was unliked during the 2004 election when people assumed he'd lose because he was unpopular and young people didn't like him. Well, he then got himself a mandate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 13, 2017, 06:02:52 PM
If Trump brings jobs to the rust belt and midwest (read: swing-states) then he will win again easily. Assuming changes to the electoral system don't take place.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 13, 2017, 06:11:25 PM
freak the NAACP, I guess.

https://theintercept.com/2017/02/13/naacp-trump-netneutrality/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 20, 2017, 12:57:33 PM
Tommy's boy Milo Yiannopoulous:

Quote
Milo: “This is a controversial point of view I accept. We get hung up on this kind of child abuse stuff to the point where we’re heavily policing even relationships between consenting adults, you know grad students and professors at universities.”

The men in the joint video interview then discuss Milo’s experience at age 14.

Another man says: “The whole consent thing for me. It’s not this black and white thing that people try to paint it. Are there some 13-year-olds out there capable of giving informed consent to have sex with an adult, probably…” The man says, “The reason these age of consent laws exist is because we have to set some kind of a barometer here, we’ve got to pick some kind of an age…”

Milo: “The law is probably about right, that’s probably roughly the right age. I think it’s probably about okay, but there are certainly people who are capable of giving consent at a younger age, I certainly consider myself to be one of them, people who are sexually active younger. I think it particularly happens in the gay world by the way. In many cases actually those relationships with older men…This is one reason I hate the left. This stupid one size fits all policing of culture. (People speak over each other). This sort of arbitrary and oppressive idea of consent, which totally destroys you know understanding that many of us have. The complexities and subtleties and complicated nature of many relationships. You know, people are messy and complex. In the homosexual world particularly. Some of those relationships between younger boys and older men, the sort of coming of age relationships, the relationships in which those older men help those young boys to discover who they are, and give them security and safety and provide them with love and a reliable and sort of a rock where they can’t speak to their parents. Some of those relationships are the most -”

It sounds like Catholic priest molestation to me, another man says, interrupting Milo.

Milo: “And you know what, I’m grateful for Father Michael. I wouldn’t give nearly such good head if it wasn’t for him.”

Other people talk. Oh my God, I can’t handle it, one man says. The next thing in line is going to be pedophilia…says another man.

Milo: “You’re misunderstanding what pedophilia means. Pedophilia is not a sexual attraction to somebody 13-years-old who is sexually mature. Pedophilia is attraction to children who have not reached puberty. Pedophilia is attraction to people who don’t have functioning sex organs yet. Who have not gone through puberty. Who are too young to be able (unclear and cut off by others)…That’s not what we are talking about. You don’t understand what pedophilia is if you are saying I’m defending it because I’m certainly not.”

Another man said, “You are advocating for cross generational relationships here, can be honest about that?”

Milo: “Yeah, I don’t mind admitting that. I think particularly in the gay world and outside the Catholic church, if that’s where some of you want to go with this, I think in the gay world, some of the most important, enriching and incredibly life affirming, important shaping relationships very often between younger boys and older men, they can be hugely positive experiences for those young boys they can even save those young boys, from desolation, from suicide (people talk over each other)… providing they’re consensual.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on February 20, 2017, 02:58:36 PM
what the fvck

what the actual fvck
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 20, 2017, 03:24:56 PM
He's obviously not defending pedophiles, but saying that in his experience as a gay teen he's had consensual sex with older men, who probably would've been called pedophiles under the blanket definition. I mean, we sort of celebrate these teen boys who bang their hot older female teachers, so I think there's a little bit of a double standard there.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on February 20, 2017, 03:26:20 PM
Jfc
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 20, 2017, 03:43:59 PM
I was going to type what a bundle of sticks but he is, so it defeats the purpose. That guy's a jerk off, even cracking wise with the Father Michael "joke". I hope  someone does what they did in Sleepers to that lover of the older lady.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 20, 2017, 04:53:43 PM
Tommy's boy Milo Yiannopoulous:

Hm. I get it that piece of excrement Glenn Beck was behind this campaign, and this is sadly par for the course for people like him and Matt Walsh and the like, but its interesting now to see the left aiding in the smearing of a homosexual man as a pedo.

Which is to say nothing of how out of context this all is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 20, 2017, 05:39:41 PM
Hm. I get it that piece of excrement Glenn Beck was behind this campaign, and this is sadly par for the course for people like him and Matt Walsh and the like, but its interesting now to see the left aiding in the smearing of a homosexual man as a pedo.

Which is to say nothing of how out of context this all is.

I don't read Breitbart but it's funny how it gets labeled as a Neo-Nazi platform when the last few editors were Milo, a gay ethnically Greek Brit, and Ben Shapiro, an American Orthodox Jew.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on February 20, 2017, 05:41:04 PM
How about don't have sex with teenagers?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on February 20, 2017, 05:49:10 PM
Simon & Schuster didn't care about Yiannopolous' racism, sexism, or transphobia but suddenly now draw the line at defending pedophilia.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 20, 2017, 06:06:44 PM
So over 100 people lost their jobs for not bothering to go to work and instead participate in the "day without immigrants" protest. A lot of them are shocked that their employers would fire them for not showing up to work. The horror!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 20, 2017, 08:06:36 PM
its interesting now to see the left aiding in the smearing of a homosexual man as a pedo.

Clearly those rabid lefties at the American Conservative Union, the pinkos at Simon and Schuster and the hardcore communists at Breitbart, all of whom have decided to put significant space between him and them, are guilty as you charge them, but I'd be interested to see other examples.

Even Milo himself doesn't seem to think it's those evil pinko lefties doing it:

Quote
There's a video going around that purports to show me saying anti-semitic things (nope) and advocating for pedophilia (big nope). The shocking thing? It's Republicans doing it. Sad to see establishment types collapse into the same tactics as social justice warriors: name calling, deceptively edited videos, confected moral outrage and public shaming.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 20, 2017, 09:07:54 PM
Clearly those rabid lefties at the American Conservative Union, the pinkos at Simon and Schuster and the hardcore communists at Breitbart, all of whom have decided to put significant space between him and them, are guilty as you charge them, but I'd be interested to see other examples.

Even Milo himself doesn't seem to think it's those evil pinko lefties doing it:

It's like you willingly ignored the first part of my comment. I literally said who's behind it. That doesn't mean people on the left haven't completely jumped on the bandwagon out of a hatred for Milo.

This is an old trope, it's the type of homophobia that the right needs to run from and it makes me sick that somewhere fat freaking Glenn Beck is laughing his derriere off at this because he thinks his brand of conservatism still has any sort of future and he's neutralized a libertarian "threat" . NOBODY WANTED TED CRUZ AS PRESIDENT.

As far as what Andrew said, yeah of course, no one should ever freak kids, which makes the way he handles his abuse (humor) slightly understandable? It's a defense mechanism.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 21, 2017, 04:34:35 AM
It's like you willingly ignored the first part of my comment. I literally said who's behind it. That doesn't mean people on the left haven't completely jumped on the bandwagon out of a hatred for Milo.

This is an old trope, it's the type of homophobia that the right needs to run from and it makes me sick that somewhere fat freaking Glenn Beck is laughing his derriere off at this because he thinks his brand of conservatism still has any sort of future and he's neutralized a libertarian "threat" . NOBODY WANTED TED CRUZ AS PRESIDENT.

As far as what Andrew said, yeah of course, no one should ever freak kids, which makes the way he handles his abuse (humor) slightly understandable? It's a defense mechanism.

Do you want to maybe throw George Soros in there? I'm suuure he's behind it somehow.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on February 21, 2017, 06:48:06 AM
So over 100 people lost their jobs for not bothering to go to work and instead participate in the "day without immigrants" protest. A lot of them are shocked that their employers would fire them for not showing up to work. The horror!
Very unlike the situation where an employer is extremely happy and overjoyed when Trump BFF and #1 defender Tommyanne decides to not show up for work
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 21, 2017, 07:55:37 AM
Very unlike the situation where an employer is extremely happy and overjoyed when Trump BFF and #1 defender Tommyanne decides to not show up for work
2/10 low effort
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 21, 2017, 07:56:14 AM
Do you want to maybe throw George Soros in there? I'm suuure he's behind it somehow.

Probably need to work in HRC's pizza shop as well for the full bingo card.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 21, 2017, 08:04:07 AM
Probably need to work in HRC's pizza shop as well for the full bingo card.
PAID PROTESTERS
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 21, 2017, 08:23:45 AM
Do you want to maybe throw George Soros in there? I'm suuure he's behind it somehow.

Glenn Beck and Soros have what to do with each other exactly?

I love this place. We've gone from willfully ignoring where I say, "hey I fully understand this was a publication that identifies with the right that started all of this and put the narrative out there" to dropping the name of essentially the closest thing we have on this world to a real life Bond villain (I'd argue even the creators of Quantum of Solace agree since they named the freaking villains company after Soros' wealth management fund). And rather then paint me as some sort of crazy conspiracy theorist (even though Soros does actually indirectly pay anarchist protesters), maybe I don't know...look to the source of who started the "Milo is a Pedo" nonsense and it'll take you right to TheBlaze. Which of course, was never even freaking taken seriously until yesterday.

Badg, even though we agree on next to nothing when it comes to politics, I always appreciate you approaching things from a cerebral perspective (yea, freak you SG you idiot), but this comment was literally retarded.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 21, 2017, 08:24:13 AM
Simon & Schuster didn't care about Yiannopolous' racism, sexism, or transphobia but suddenly now draw the line at defending pedophilia.

Examples please.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 21, 2017, 09:10:00 AM
Glenn Beck and Soros have what to do with each other exactly?

I love this place. We've gone from willfully ignoring where I say, "hey I fully understand this was a publication that identifies with the right that started all of this and put the narrative out there" to dropping the name of essentially the closest thing we have on this world to a real life Bond villain (I'd argue even the creators of Quantum of Solace agree since they named the freaking villains company after Soros' wealth management fund). And rather then paint me as some sort of crazy conspiracy theorist (even though Soros does actually indirectly pay anarchist protesters), maybe I don't know...look to the source of who started the "Milo is a Pedo" nonsense and it'll take you right to TheBlaze. Which of course, was never even freaking taken seriously until yesterday.

Badg, even though we agree on next to nothing when it comes to politics, I always appreciate you approaching things from a cerebral perspective (yea, freak you SG you idiot), but this comment was literally retarded.
I'm gonna be nice and ignore the Soros conspiracy stuff and offer the measured response you deserve.

Why would you (or anyone) waste your time, energy, and credibility defending MY?

His entire shtick is based on two things: he says "non-PC" things to get a rise out of people (basically trolling) and being the token gay guy that the right can point to and say "It can't be homophobic/sexist/racist if Milo said it!"

I've been aware of him long before his recent rise to national prominence, and he was probably better off staying on the fringe of political commentary.

I agree that age of consent is a nuanced issue, I agree that we throw the word pedophile around too liberally, and I know he just made the priest comment for shock value. I'm not going to disavow Bill Maher or anyone else for having him on their show. But no way would I ever defend this guy.

Just let the left eat him so they can feel like they won something, and he can go back to the echo chamber he belongs in.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 21, 2017, 09:25:11 AM
I'd rather have a guy like Peter Thiel be the face of Gay Conservatives than Milo. Milo is more of an anti-PC guy. I like the guy and his anti-PC messages, but he's just too polarizing of a figure.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 21, 2017, 10:24:11 AM
I'd rather have a guy like Peter Thiel be the face of Gay Conservatives than Milo. Milo is more of an anti-PC guy. I like the guy and his anti-PC messages, but he's just too polarizing of a figure.

That's just it, Milo is more of a libertarian. In terms of the more intellectually deep of the two, and who should be taken more seriously, it's really not close when you consider Thiel's record of accomplishment on top of his (IMHO incredibly underrated) ability to successfully orate his positions without resorting to shtick. Added bonus for bankrolling a certain lawsuit, and driving possibly the biggest dumpster fire in existence out of business...brother.

Easily, half of what Milo does is a gimmick. I'm a wrestling fan I know gimmickry when I see it. However, considering the absolute regressive and toxic nature of college campuses around this country, and the inability of others who are attempting to do the same thing but fail miserably (Ben Shapiro can be the most intelligent guy in the room, break down the opposition like surgeon and it won't matter because he has the charisma of a wet fart), I do think his exposing of this militant mindset, and the exposure of absolute psychos and regressive pigs like Yvette Falcara is actually important work.

I'm gonna be nice and ignore the Soros conspiracy stuff and offer the measured response you deserve.

Why would you (or anyone) waste your time, energy, and credibility defending MY?

His entire shtick is based on two things: he says "non-PC" things to get a rise out of people (basically trolling) and being the token gay guy that the right can point to and say "It can't be homophobic/sexist/racist if Milo said it!"

I've been aware of him long before his recent rise to national prominence, and he was probably better off staying on the fringe of political commentary.

I agree that age of consent is a nuanced issue, I agree that we throw the word pedophile around too liberally, and I know he just made the priest comment for shock value. I'm not going to disavow Bill Maher or anyone else for having him on their show. But no way would I ever defend this guy.

Just let the left eat him so they can feel like they won something, and he can go back to the echo chamber he belongs in.

I'm going to make an analogy. When Richard Spenser got punched in the face, there was no defense on my end for him because Richard Spenser is a gigantic piece of excrement, who should be ostracized from any sort of reasonable community. Then Milo got accused of being a Nazi (he's not.). Then Gavin McGinnis got accused of being a Nazi and pepper-sprayed in the face (also not). Point is, there is an importance in nipping certain behavior in the bud, even if when the first time its perpetuated, the object of the behavior is someone we don't like.

If it's this easy to bring down a figure in taking statements completely out of context, and essentially using one's own traumatic experience against them, even if you despise Milo, how long until its able to be done against people with views you'd find more acceptable? Dave Rubin is a classical liberal who's building a conservative audience at the expense of douchey Glenn Beck, etc. He's also gay. How long until they manipulate questionable comments from his past, take them out of context and use an anti-gay stereotype to discredit him?

The old conservative guard lost its grip, and they know it. They can't take down Trump (and their best effort was comprised of a bald shitbag in Evan McMullin), so they'll shoot his most ardent messengers. Full disclosure, these people are also the same social regressives that I blame for the GOP not embracing a more moderate social platform, the same people that want government out of their lives but inexplicably want to legislate what occurs in the bedroom of two consulting adults. So as far as I'm concerned, they should've gotten fucked long before this.

As far as Milo's racism, homophobia etc...it's a common theme used to discredit Milo, but I've watched his stuff and can easily point to dozens of instances where he discusses the danger of identity politics and judging people based on immutable characteristics. I'm not going to sit here and say he isn't guilty of misogyny and transphobia, however they're usually said in jest (again, part of the shtick) and as a response to the absolute ridiculousness of third-wave feminism and the trans movements outright demand that social mores be abandoned and biological fact be disregarded to placate to 0.6 percent of the adult population.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 21, 2017, 10:51:11 AM
That's just it, Milo is more of a libertarian. In terms of the more intellectually deep of the two, and who should be taken more seriously, it's really not close when you consider Thiel's record of accomplishment on top of his (IMHO incredibly underrated) ability to successfully orate his positions without resorting to shtick. Added bonus for bankrolling a certain lawsuit, and driving possibly the biggest dumpster fire in existence out of business...brother.

Easily, half of what Milo does is a gimmick. I'm a wrestling fan I know gimmickry when I see it. However, considering the absolute regressive and toxic nature of college campuses around this country, and the inability of others who are attempting to do the same thing but fail miserably (Ben Shapiro can be the most intelligent guy in the room, break down the opposition like surgeon and it won't matter because he has the charisma of a wet fart), I do think his exposing of this militant mindset, and the exposure of absolute psychos and regressive pigs like Yvette Falcara is actually important work.

I'm going to make an analogy. When Richard Spenser got punched in the face, there was no defense on my end for him because Richard Spenser is a gigantic piece of excrement, who should be ostracized from any sort of reasonable community. Then Milo got accused of being a Nazi (he's not.). Then Gavin McGinnis got accused of being a Nazi and pepper-sprayed in the face (also not). Point is, there is an importance in nipping certain behavior in the bud, even if when the first time its perpetuated, the object of the behavior is someone we don't like.

If it's this easy to bring down a figure in taking statements completely out of context, and essentially using one's own traumatic experience against them, even if you despise Milo, how long until its able to be done against people with views you'd find more acceptable? Dave Rubin is a classical liberal who's building a conservative audience at the expense of douchey Glenn Beck, etc. He's also gay. How long until they manipulate questionable comments from his past, take them out of context and use an anti-gay stereotype to discredit him?

The old conservative guard lost its grip, and they know it. They can't take down Trump (and their best effort was comprised of a bald shitbag in Evan McMullin), so they'll shoot his most ardent messengers. Full disclosure, these people are also the same social regressives that I blame for the GOP not embracing a more moderate social platform, the same people that want government out of their lives but inexplicably want to legislate what occurs in the bedroom of two consulting adults. So as far as I'm concerned, they should've gotten fucked long before this.

As far as Milo's racism, homophobia etc...it's a common theme used to discredit Milo, but I've watched his stuff and can easily point to dozens of instances where he discusses the danger of identity politics and judging people based on immutable characteristics. I'm not going to sit here and say he isn't guilty of misogyny and transphobia, however they're usually said in jest (again, part of the shtick) and as a response to the absolute ridiculousness of third-wave feminism and the trans movements outright demand that social mores be abandoned and biological fact be disregarded to placate to 0.6 percent of the adult population.

I encourage people to watch some of Milo's videos on Youtube where he has actual respectable arguments with people who disagree with him. When his shtick is set aside he's very articulate and drives his point, and has done a very good job of defending himself against attacks. Ben Shapiro is the same, but he's pretty  much the anti-Milo since they both have similar points but their delivery is way different.

Again it's funny when Breitbart gets called a white supremacist platform when those two guys were/are editors and the best known ones for that matter. An openly gay flamboyant brit and an orthodox jew.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 21, 2017, 10:55:28 AM
I encourage people to watch some of Milo's videos on Youtube where he has actual respectable arguments with people who disagree with him. When his shtick is set aside he's very articulate and drives his point, and has done a very good job of defending himself against attacks. Ben Shapiro is the same, but he's pretty  much the anti-Milo since they both have similar points but their delivery is way different.

Again it's funny when Breitbart gets called a white supremacist platform when those two guys were/are editors and the best known ones for that matter. An openly gay flamboyant brit and an orthodox jew.

Double the laughs when the sources of these criticisms are either authors or purveyors of garbage from places like Jezebel, Refinery29, or Salon. Where every societal issue ever can be blamed on cis, white males.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 21, 2017, 11:56:13 AM
Don't you guys ever get tired of this
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 21, 2017, 12:47:27 PM
Don't you guys ever get tired of this

Do you get tired of gay porn?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 21, 2017, 12:48:44 PM
Do you get tired of gay porn?
No
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 21, 2017, 01:53:30 PM
Milo just resigned from Breitbart.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 21, 2017, 02:03:23 PM
when is Trump going to resign?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 21, 2017, 02:05:32 PM
No

Well then you know how they feel.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 21, 2017, 02:14:43 PM
when is Trump going to resign?

January 20th, 2025.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 21, 2017, 02:33:27 PM
Hahaha if the election was to happen again, he would lose to a sock puppet.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 21, 2017, 02:57:03 PM
January 20th, 2025.

if he lives that long, i'll be impressed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 21, 2017, 03:01:06 PM
Hahaha if the election was to happen again, he would lose to a sock puppet.

Hm. That sock puppet must be getting over with the American people though considering if an election were held today Trump would trounce such establishment hacks as Liawatha Liz. http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/02/elizabeth-warren-2020-poll-trump
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 21, 2017, 03:20:23 PM
Hm. That sock puppet must be getting over with the American people though considering if an election were held today Trump would trounce such establishment hacks as Liawatha Liz. http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/02/elizabeth-warren-2020-poll-trump (http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/02/elizabeth-warren-2020-poll-trump)

I am not a democrat, I don't know too much about Warren, certainly not enough to vote for her at this point and neither does 99.9% of the voters answering that poll. I have voted Dem for President once in my life and frankly am embarrassed I made that choice, even if it was strictly out of protest (it most certainly was not HRC).

I am not like you or Tommy, married to the total jackass in the White House strictly because of his party affiliation. I don't care if he was my own brother, if he acted like that, he wouldn't get my vote and I would tell him as such.

 I look at solving issues based on the merits of the solution, not which party the solution emanated from.  However, this thread lives on  because no matter what he does or says or how much horseshit he can pull out of thin air, people , Tommy especially, will eat it up like it's an aged steak. I choose not to. Quite frankly, a lot of people I know who voted for Trump, are completely embarrassed right now, by his conduct, behavior and questionable decision making and/or a mix.




Edit: I think the poll is funny, why not use Nancy Pelosi as well. You can't use women that are closely associated with HRC. She was a legendary bad candidate, talk about a shitty poll. Warren is a proxy for HRC and Trump clearly beat her already. My opinion still stands people would vote for a sock puppet over Trump currently.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 21, 2017, 03:26:29 PM
Hm. That sock puppet must be getting over with the American people though considering if an election were held today Trump would trounce such establishment hacks as Liawatha Liz. http://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/02/elizabeth-warren-2020-poll-trump

I think we can throw polls out the window at this point.  The silly nickname side won when all the polls said otherwise.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 21, 2017, 03:32:57 PM
I am not a democrat, I don't know too much about Warren, certainly not enough to vote for her at this point and neither does 99.9% of the voters answering that poll. I have voted Dem for President once in my life and frankly am embarrassed I made that choice, even if it was strictly out of protest.

I am not like you or Tommy, married to the total jackass in the White House strictly because of his party affiliation. I don't care if he was my own brother, if he acted like that, he wouldn't get my vote and I would tell him as such.

 I look at solving issues based on the merits of the solution, not which party the solution emanated from.  However, this thread lives on  because no matter what he does or says or how much horseshit he can pull out of thin air, people , Tommy especially, will eat it up like it's an aged steak. I choose not to. Quite frankly, a lot of people I know who voted for Trump, are completely embarrassed right now, by his conduct, behavior and questionable decision making and/or a mix.




Edit: I think the poll is funny, why not use Nancy Pelosi as well. You can't use women that are closely associated with HRC. She was a legendary bad candidate, talk about a shitty poll. Warren is a proxy for HRC and Trump clearly beat her already. My opinion still stands people would vote for a sock puppet over Trump currently.

Except this isn't true Puck. I think the President is very open to criticism, it's just people in their criticisms are freaking retarded. I apologize if that is crude, there's literally no other way to say it. 

Example: Jeff Sessions as AG. Sessions is a freaking dinosaur, a man that thinks civil asset forfeiture is sound policy, and that the War on Drugs is effective. He got the job solely because he was the first establishment politician to bend the knee, even before Fatso Christie. These are all legit, and fair criticisms.

So of course, Democrats ignore all of that, drudge up discredited testimony from 1986 and scream racism.

Glenn Greenwald is an example of an "establishment" media personality that I follow and enjoy. Highly critical of Trump. But making the correct criticisms.

As far as Trump losing to a sock puppet, fair enough. Good thing for him then, that a sock puppet is way more competent then the supposed picks coming out of the left for 2020 including the previously mentioned Fauxahontas, and Cory Booker.

Tulsi Gabbard is someone who I disagree with a lot in terms of economic and social policy. She's also a political rockstar that IMHO especially with a centrist VP pick (Jim Webb for example) would decimate Trump in a general election. I don't think it'd even be close. So of course, as punishment for being a principled politician and speaking out during the whole fiasco where the DNC literally rigged their primaries at the expense of Old Man Sanders, she's now seen as a turncoat and a traitor.

I look forward to bringing her name up four years from now when Democrats after running an establishment whore like Booker for no other reason then his skin color ( I voted for him for Senate on the basis that its impossible to establish a positive record in Newark and he should be afforded an opportunity in the Senate. He has done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to reward my vote) have absolutely zero idea how Trump won re-election.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 21, 2017, 03:39:40 PM
Except this isn't true Puck. I think the President is very open to criticism, it's just people in their criticisms are freaking retarded. I apologize if that is crude, there's literally no other way to say it. 

Example: Jeff Sessions as AG. Sessions is a freaking dinosaur, a man that thinks civil asset forfeiture is sound policy, and that the War on Drugs is effective. He got the job solely because he was the first establishment politician to bend the knee, even before Fatso Christie. These are all legit, and fair criticisms.

So of course, Democrats ignore all of that, drudge up discredited testimony from 1986 and scream racism.

Glenn Greenwald is an example of an "establishment" media personality that I follow and enjoy. Highly critical of Trump. But making the correct criticisms.

As far as Trump losing to a sock puppet, fair enough. Good thing for him then, that a sock puppet is way more competent then the supposed picks coming out of the left for 2020 including the previously mentioned Fauxahontas, and Cory Booker.

Tulsi Gabbard is someone who I disagree with a lot in terms of economic and social policy. She's also a political rockstar that IMHO especially with a centrist VP pick (Jim Webb for example) would decimate Trump in a general election. I don't think it'd even be close. So of course, as punishment for being a principled politician and speaking out during the whole fiasco where the DNC literally rigged their primaries at the expense of Old Man Sanders, she's now seen as a turncoat and a traitor.

I look forward to bringing her name up four years from now when Democrats after running an establishment whore like Booker for no other reason then his skin color ( I voted for him for Senate on the basis that its impossible to establish a positive record in Newark and he should be afforded an opportunity in the Senate. He has done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to reward my vote) have absolutely zero idea how Trump won re-election.

(http://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20160429/800ace4872d101187a805f476ab48b11.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 21, 2017, 03:52:22 PM
Except this isn't true Puck. I think the President is very open to criticism, it's just people in their criticisms are freaking retarded. I apologize if that is crude, there's literally no other way to say it. 

Example: Jeff Sessions as AG. Sessions is a freaking dinosaur, a man that thinks civil asset forfeiture is sound policy, and that the War on Drugs is effective. He got the job solely because he was the first establishment politician to bend the knee, even before Fatso Christie. These are all legit, and fair criticisms.

So of course, Democrats ignore all of that, drudge up discredited testimony from 1986 and scream racism.

Glenn Greenwald is an example of an "establishment" media personality that I follow and enjoy. Highly critical of Trump. But making the correct criticisms.

As far as Trump losing to a sock puppet, fair enough. Good thing for him then, that a sock puppet is way more competent then the supposed picks coming out of the left for 2020 including the previously mentioned Fauxahontas, and Cory Booker.

Tulsi Gabbard is someone who I disagree with a lot in terms of economic and social policy. She's also a political rockstar that IMHO especially with a centrist VP pick (Jim Webb for example) would decimate Trump in a general election. I don't think it'd even be close. So of course, as punishment for being a principled politician and speaking out during the whole fiasco where the DNC literally rigged their primaries at the expense of Old Man Sanders, she's now seen as a turncoat and a traitor.

I look forward to bringing her name up four years from now when Democrats after running an establishment whore like Booker for no other reason then his skin color ( I voted for him for Senate on the basis that its impossible to establish a positive record in Newark and he should be afforded an opportunity in the Senate. He has done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to reward my vote) have absolutely zero idea how Trump won re-election.

Sessions was a racist freak 30 years ago.  I think people can change in 30 years.  I agree that was silly to go after.

Saying people's names like you have Trump's dick jammed in your mouth doesn't help your argument.  Just saying.  Warren isn't going to run anyway.  She will have crazy power in the senate in 2-4 years.

Booker could be a solid VP pick, but I don't think he has the charisma and/or progressive backing for the top spot.

The democratic primaries were not rigged.  I was for Sanders but cringed every time he said it.  The emails proved nothing.  The DNC may have been pulling for Hillary, which is messed up in general, but it didn't change the outcome.

A Newsom/Booker ticket would crush in 2020.  I'm just not sure if Newsom wants to take the leap that soon.  He will be handed the governor reigns of California in the near future.  Not sure who the alternative would be, but it won't be Booker or Warren.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 21, 2017, 03:55:59 PM
Except this isn't true Puck. I think the President is very open to criticism, it's just people in their criticisms are freaking retarded. I apologize if that is crude, there's literally no other way to say it. 

Example: Jeff Sessions as AG. Sessions is a freaking dinosaur, a man that thinks civil asset forfeiture is sound policy, and that the War on Drugs is effective. He got the job solely because he was the first establishment politician to bend the knee, even before Fatso Christie. These are all legit, and fair criticisms.

So of course, Democrats ignore all of that, drudge up discredited testimony from 1986 and scream racism.

Glenn Greenwald is an example of an "establishment" media personality that I follow and enjoy. Highly critical of Trump. But making the correct criticisms.

As far as Trump losing to a sock puppet, fair enough. Good thing for him then, that a sock puppet is way more competent then the supposed picks coming out of the left for 2020 including the previously mentioned Fauxahontas, and Cory Booker.

Tulsi Gabbard is someone who I disagree with a lot in terms of economic and social policy. She's also a political rockstar that IMHO especially with a centrist VP pick (Jim Webb for example) would decimate Trump in a general election. I don't think it'd even be close. So of course, as punishment for being a principled politician and speaking out during the whole fiasco where the DNC literally rigged their primaries at the expense of Old Man Sanders, she's now seen as a turncoat and a traitor.

I look forward to bringing her name up four years from now when Democrats after running an establishment whore like Booker for no other reason then his skin color ( I voted for him for Senate on the basis that its impossible to establish a positive record in Newark and he should be afforded an opportunity in the Senate. He has done ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to reward my vote) have absolutely zero idea how Trump won re-election.

I can't see him winning re-election at this point and my comment on sock puppet, was obviously just a joke, as the democrats would never make such an informed choice, not in a million years.

freak it, since we are admitting voting mistakes, I voted Obama the first go around strictly because McCain picked Palin. I couldn't believe and frankly still can't, out of the myriad of people to be VP, she was his top choice. The second she opened her mouth I was like, WTF?

I was 100% voting for McCain. Now mind you, I know VP has nothing to do with running the day to day of the country. However, nothing can convince me a person that made that poor of a choice for VP, would be a good President. Anyway, if I could take back that moment in the voting box, I would probably write in Alfred E. Neuman.

Put it this way, the Presidents since Reagan are getting worse and worse, almost in that direct order. Although, I would say Obama and Bush #2 were equally disastrous, with Georgey ahead by a nose or behind, as a tad worse.


To be honest, I am absolutely tired of the polarization of political thought. The majority of smart Americans is somewhere in the center. Yet we continually get excrement on by both parties like the middle class is some kind of toilet. I can't think of one candidate from either side that would be palatable right now. I really think we need another party or two, get term limits and start taking back our Country from the whores. That just won't happen.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 21, 2017, 04:12:01 PM
I can't see him winning re-election at this point and my comment on sock puppet, was obviously just a joke,

You say that, but the poll referenced by mj2sexay actually stated that although Warren would lose, an as yet unnamed Democrat (your sock puppet) would win comfortably (taking 43% of polled voters as opposed to Trump taking 33%).

They just need to keep that freaking idiot Wasserman-Schulz and her band of crooks and cronies away from the process.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 21, 2017, 04:21:25 PM
Polls 4 years before an election are about as useful as ESPN's Preseason Power Rankings.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 21, 2017, 04:51:46 PM
Polls 4 years before an election are about as useful as ESPN's Preseason Power Rankings.

Or about as useful as polls 1 day before an election.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 21, 2017, 05:16:05 PM
Or about as useful as polls 1 day before an election.

Ha. Fair point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 21, 2017, 05:31:36 PM
I thought Palin was kinda hot in a MILF way for about 4 seconds back in the day.  Before she, you know, spoke.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 21, 2017, 06:08:59 PM
I think we can throw polls out the window at this point.  The silly nickname side won when all the polls said otherwise.

This is very true. TIL: Gallup had Romney winning the national vote in 2012, and even I could've told you there was just no way that was ever going to happen. These things don't mean excrement.

You say that, but the poll referenced by mj2sexay actually stated that although Warren would lose, an as yet unnamed Democrat (your sock puppet) would win comfortably (taking 43% of polled voters as opposed to Trump taking 33%).

They just need to keep that freaking idiot Wasserman-Schulz and her band of crooks and cronies away from the process.

Unfortunately, I'm not sure who this leaves.

freak it, since we are admitting voting mistakes, I voted Obama the first go around strictly because McCain picked Palin. I couldn't believe and frankly still can't, out of the myriad of people to be VP, she was his top choice. The second she opened her mouth I was like, WTF?

I was 100% voting for McCain. Now mind you, I know VP has nothing to do with running the day to day of the country. However, nothing can convince me a person that made that poor of a choice for VP, would be a good President. Anyway, if I could take back that moment in the voting box, I would probably write in Alfred E. Neuman.

That was my first election in which I was eligible to vote. Considering I was also going to vote McCain and then decided to stay the hell home after hearing her speak. Just off anecdotal evidence, I'm really wishing someone performed a study to see if Palin was the most destructive VP choice to a mainstream ticket in recorded history. The best part is, it reeks of establishment GOP thinking, "HEY! They have a black guy! I guess we gotta counter with a woman on our ticket!" I was in a fraternity at Seton Hall at the time, we had an election mixer that night. Granted we were at a young age, but even among my friends that did vote McCain, I remember there no enthusiasm that night, even before it became a formality. 

Quote
I can't think of one candidate from either side that would be palatable right now. I really think we need another party or two, get term limits and start taking back our Country from the whores. That just won't happen.

I voted for Johnson in 2012. So to see him make a total derriere out of himself this election season, even in situations that weren't gotcha moments was pathetic. Sad actually. This was a great opportunity for a third party to make any sort of breakthrough, and yet neither Gary nor Jill came close to 5 percent of the vote.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 21, 2017, 11:09:49 PM
There was a concerted effort by both big parties to smear the third party candidates. Stein and Johnson both ran in 2012 and went largely unnoticed. 2016 rolled around, Clinton and Trump were awful, so they had to knock the alternatives down a few pegs to make sure the average voter wouldn't stray.

Sure they had flaws but they were nothing out of the ordinary compared the rest of the field. Does anyone honestly believe Trump would have been able to handle a question about Aleppo that he wasn't specifically prepared for? Only difference is he would just say "There are a lot of bad things happening in Aleppo, believe me" instead of being honest about drawing a blank.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 22, 2017, 08:40:29 AM
There was a concerted effort by both big parties to smear the third party candidates. Stein and Johnson both ran in 2012 and went largely unnoticed. 2016 rolled around, Clinton and Trump were awful, so they had to knock the alternatives down a few pegs to make sure the average voter wouldn't stray.

Sure they had flaws but they were nothing out of the ordinary compared the rest of the field. Does anyone honestly believe Trump would have been able to handle a question about Aleppo that he wasn't specifically prepared for? Only difference is he would just say "There are a lot of bad things happening in Aleppo, believe me" instead of being honest about drawing a blank.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170222/a4dd77099f388e265d20639c7a253dfa.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 22, 2017, 09:34:47 AM
There was a concerted effort by both big parties to smear the third party candidates. Stein and Johnson both ran in 2012 and went largely unnoticed. 2016 rolled around, Clinton and Trump were awful, so they had to knock the alternatives down a few pegs to make sure the average voter wouldn't stray.

Sure they had flaws but they were nothing out of the ordinary compared the rest of the field. Does anyone honestly believe Trump would have been able to handle a question about Aleppo that he wasn't specifically prepared for? Only difference is he would just say "There are a lot of bad things happening in Aleppo, believe me" instead of being honest about drawing a blank.

Definitely a lot of truth to this, however the Gary Johnson I voted for in 2012 wouldn't have admonished Guy Benson for using the term "illegal" instead of "undocumented" It's a small and silly thing I know, but merely an example. There was a definite period where he abandoned some of his long-held positions to pick up the disaffected Bernie vote after the old man decided he couldn't fight the entire DNC even with his grassroots support. And Weld was a really misguided VP pick.

I followed the libertarian primary fairly closely, and I'm at a loss unfortunately to say who the best choice would've been. McAfee was out of his mind. Petersen it could be argued wasn't even a true libertarian, on top of being an unlikable dick.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 22, 2017, 09:56:31 AM
There was a concerted effort by both big parties to smear the third party candidates. Stein and Johnson both ran in 2012 and went largely unnoticed. 2016 rolled around, Clinton and Trump were awful, so they had to knock the alternatives down a few pegs to make sure the average voter wouldn't stray.

Sure they had flaws but they were nothing out of the ordinary compared the rest of the field. Does anyone honestly believe Trump would have been able to handle a question about Aleppo that he wasn't specifically prepared for? Only difference is he would just say "There are a lot of bad things happening in Aleppo, believe me" instead of being honest about drawing a blank.

Yeah I wasn't really that critical of Johnson for not knowing or remembering the name Aleppo. I'm sure he was well versed in the Syrian crisis, but the name Aleppo isn't exactly thrown around the news as much as other cities in past conflicts (i.e Mogadishu, Sarajevo, etc), so I don't fault him for not knowing it on the spot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 23, 2017, 08:01:04 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170224/a761bff73fbce825bbc9c7b6b3f015f1.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 23, 2017, 09:57:27 PM
http://www.salon.com/2015/06/10/why_libertarianism_is_so_popular_on_the_right_its_the_last_bastion_of_white_male_dominance/

America 2017: Voice your opinion! Get out there and vote! Raise awareness! March! Protest! Unless you are a White Male, in which case you are a misogynist, racist, sexist poopchute whose opinion isn't allowed to exist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on February 24, 2017, 09:31:07 AM
Why are you reading Salon articles from 2015?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 24, 2017, 07:39:51 PM
Why are you reading Salon articles from 2015?

Why can't you be happy for him, he actually read something. Maybe a book is in his future. Congratulate him.......
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 24, 2017, 08:08:06 PM
https://theintercept.com/2017/02/24/key-question-about-dnc-race-why-did-white-house-recruit-perez-to-run-against-ellison/

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on February 25, 2017, 05:16:22 PM
Quote
Donald J. Trump @realDonaldTrump
Congratulations to Thomas Perez, who has just been named Chairman of the DNC. I could not be happier for him, or for the Republican Party!

What a douchebag.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 25, 2017, 06:06:39 PM
freak that guy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 25, 2017, 06:28:51 PM
freak that guy.

I'm not familiar with Perez but I know that some are unhappy that he was selected over Ellison. Can you give me the Cliffs Notes as to why?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 25, 2017, 06:44:28 PM
I'm not familiar with Perez but I know that some are unhappy that he was selected over Ellison. Can you give me the Cliffs Notes as to why?
Probably because he is not as much of a cuck
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 25, 2017, 07:42:39 PM
Probably because he is not as much of a cuck
He's 10x more of a cuck.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 25, 2017, 07:43:17 PM
I'm not familiar with Perez but I know that some are unhappy that he was selected over Ellison. Can you give me the Cliffs Notes as to why?
Ellison = Sanders

Perez = Clinton
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on February 25, 2017, 08:22:35 PM
Ellison = Sanders

Perez = Clinton

That's a bit of an oversimplification.

Perez appointed Ellison deputy chair.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 25, 2017, 09:18:29 PM
That's a bit of an oversimplification.

Perez appointed Ellison deputy chair.
He asked for Cliff Notes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on February 25, 2017, 09:39:07 PM
That's a bit of an oversimplification.

Perez appointed Ellison deputy chair.

being appointed vice chair doesn't mean anything

tulsi gabbard was reduced to irrelevance under DWS

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on February 25, 2017, 09:42:05 PM
badger's analogy was spot on

this is further proof that politics in this country is a sham, it is never about what the people want as a whole, it is the few who have money, power, and have contributed to the livelihoods of those corrupt politicians already in place that get to choose what happens to our government

i was laughed at a month ago for telling people i could see trump as pres for 8 years because of how politics in this country works, but now think that the same system and process that was present within the DNC that allowed trump to win in november will continue on for the next election
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 25, 2017, 09:54:39 PM
Honestly, I'll give him a chance and we'll see how it goes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 26, 2017, 04:13:50 PM
I don't think moving further to the left is a good strategy for the DNC especially since Clinton, even as a shitty candidate, would probably have won had it not been for those dirty tactics that alienated the Bernie supporters. If the Democrats move further to the left then they'll have no shot in retaking those districts that Trump won.

But we know what's going to happen in 2018 and 2020, they'll run "We'll stop Trump" or "Our candidate isn't Trump" ads down our throats and it'll be the same results as 2002 and 2004.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on February 26, 2017, 04:30:30 PM
I think the fact that Trump isn't going to do a single damn thing to help lower middle class families will keep those white folks at home in 2018 and 2020.  2018 is going to be the Blue Inferno.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on February 26, 2017, 04:58:13 PM
I think the fact that Trump isn't going to do a single damn thing to help lower middle class families will keep those white folks at home in 2018 and 2020.  2018 is going to be the Blue Inferno.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Bold prediction 30 days in.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on February 26, 2017, 05:32:39 PM
Bold prediction 30 days in.

Look who's talking.

But we know what's going to happen in 2018 and 2020, they'll run "We'll stop Trump" or "Our candidate isn't Trump" ads down our throats and it'll be the same results as 2002 and 2004.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 28, 2017, 08:17:11 PM
Man Ted Cruz got fat
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 28, 2017, 08:59:45 PM
Man Ted Cruz got fat

Needs to cut back on his booger intake.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 01, 2017, 05:58:55 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170301/d23b58e6aed89ac1f50849efd7804777.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 01, 2017, 08:44:54 AM
lolololololol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 01, 2017, 07:15:49 PM
Needs to cut back on his booger intake.

Wait so he eats boogers like he eats hoo-ha or eats hoo-ha like boogers, your post is so confusing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on March 01, 2017, 07:52:14 PM
why the freak is that bitch sitting like that
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 01, 2017, 08:15:53 PM
why the freak is that bitch sitting like that
I can tell you I don't care.  I'm sure she isn't the first person to sit funny on that couch or put their feet on it.  Bill Clinton probably, well......nevermind.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 01, 2017, 10:42:30 PM
I can tell you I don't care.  I'm sure she isn't the first person to sit funny on that couch or put their feet on it.  Bill Clinton probably, well......nevermind.
Its not how she's sitting, it's the setting and circumstance.  Sitting like a 12 year old while your boss is attempting to pretend to be friends with a bunch of black men...  Out of context it would be sort of hot if she were 30 years younger.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 02, 2017, 07:26:20 AM
It really doesn't matter, since we have real problems with the administration that need attention.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 04, 2017, 08:06:15 PM
It really doesn't matter, since we have real problems with the administration that need attention.
No kidding.  I even thought the Russian thing was a stretch.

Even without that, this has Titanic written all over it.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on March 06, 2017, 09:36:31 PM
damn, ben carson really described slaves as 'immigrants' on the bottom of those ships lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 06, 2017, 10:09:47 PM
damn, ben carson really described slaves as 'immigrants' on the bottom of those ships lol

Technically he's not wrong. I guess "involuntary immigrant" might be the new branding.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on March 07, 2017, 04:55:58 AM
Technically he's not wrong. I guess "involuntary immigrant" might be the new branding.
Technically, Schmectically

Africans torn from their homelands and enslaved did not "choose to emigrate to America to "find better lives for themselves, their children and grandchildren" as Trumpy's Dr. Dimwit stated
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 07, 2017, 06:35:08 AM
We didn't land on Plymouth Rock, Plymouth Rock landed on us.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 07, 2017, 10:24:22 AM
Republican Healthcare Plan.  freak you and die unless you're rich.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 07, 2017, 11:10:10 AM
Republican Healthcare Plan.  freak you and die unless you're rich.

Care to explain why you think that's the case?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 07, 2017, 11:28:08 AM
Care to explain why you think that's the case?
That's basically the case for everything short of single payer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on March 07, 2017, 12:56:25 PM
That's basically the case for everything short of single payer.

Yeah, this is mostly Obamacare. Altering the mandate without getting rid of the preexisting conditions clause means that premiums will likely rise for those who get their insurance this way - also means that younger people will just opt out at higher rates.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 07, 2017, 03:16:37 PM
Care to explain why you think that's the case?
They are removing the subsidies.  They are doing nothing to bring down the cost of insurance, or putting anything in place to keep it from going up.  The tax breaks cover less than half the cost of any reasonable plan today.

Removing the mandate alone will cause costs to go through the roof.  If your coverage lapses for any reason, you are at the mercy of the insurance companies.  If you are lower or even middle income and cannot afford half your income, assuming you are healthy enough to work, to go towards health insurance, you die.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 08, 2017, 11:44:40 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170309/0e87d651eb0c527c69d5d074277079a4.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on March 09, 2017, 02:48:03 AM
Pretty much useless to waste time discussing the disaster known as Trumpcare.

The Orange Russian Puppet has managed to do the impossible. Unite Conservatines and Liberals in Congress in full throated opposition along with the vast majority of Americans not named Tommy.

DOA

Try again Donnie...maybe this time spend a few minutes on it in between multi million dollar golf weekends in Florida transferring tax dollars to Family business dollars.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 09, 2017, 09:53:09 AM
They managed to push through a bill that eliminates the requirement that everyone have insurance. This will likely result in young people dropping coverage, resulting in exorbitant premiums for older people who need the care (who can now be charged quadruple, rather than triple, for premiums).

FTR, I was staunchly against the tax imposed by Obamacare for those who decline coverage when it was introduced, however, in hindsight it makes sense. By not requiring the healthy (young) to own coverage and pay premiums they won't collect on, it makes the entire system more expensive for those who can afford it less (older people--especially those with families).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on March 09, 2017, 10:53:48 AM
They managed to push through a bill that eliminates the requirement that everyone have insurance. This will likely result in young people dropping coverage, resulting in exorbitant premiums for older people who need the care (who can now be charged quadruple, rather than triple, for premiums).

FTR, I was staunchly against the tax imposed by Obamacare for those who decline coverage when it was introduced, however, in hindsight it makes sense. By not requiring the healthy (young) to own coverage and pay premiums they won't collect on, it makes the entire system more expensive for those who can afford it less (older people--especially those with families).

I've never had major medical expenses but I can bet someday I will. People my age mostly seem to be of the mind that they don't need it now so freak it. How they don't ever think about if we keep things the way they are now you will need to be a multimillionaire to deal with any somewhat serious illness in the future is beyond me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 09, 2017, 11:16:55 AM
I've never had major medical expenses but I can bet someday I will. People my age mostly seem to be of the mind that they don't need it now so freak it. How they don't ever think about if we keep things the way they are now you will need to be a multimillionaire to deal with any somewhat serious illness in the future is beyond me.
What blows my mind is they are culling their own herd.  The vast majority of people on social assistance (medicaid, food stamps, etc) and social security/medicare are either poor or old white people.  Predominantly republican supporters.  If they kill them off with Trumpcare, their party is finished.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 09, 2017, 12:07:02 PM
I've never had major medical expenses but I can bet someday I will. People my age mostly seem to be of the mind that they don't need it now so freak it. How they don't ever think about if we keep things the way they are now you will need to be a multimillionaire to deal with any somewhat serious illness in the future is beyond me.

I always took employer-offered healthcare, even when single--even when not cost-effective, but I was a rare breed. Most young people are focused on short-term pleasure spending or long-term saving for big items like homes. Future health issues, if you've never really been exposed to them, are meaningless.

We do a terrible job of educating the public about health. But let's privatize public schools!

What blows my mind is they are culling their own herd. The vast majority of people on social assistance (medicaid, food stamps, etc) and social security/medicare are either poor or old white people. Predominantly republican supporters. If they kill them off with Trumpcare, their party is finished.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

I said it immediately after the election. While it's going to hurt all of us who aren't wealthy, I can't wait for Trump supporters who benefit most from the ACA (which many had no idea was the same thing as Obamacare) to lose their coverage.

But this won't hurt the Republican party one bit. The ignorant will remain ignorant (especially if they start manipulating the education system), and all they have to do is talk about the homosexuals or evil "Islamists" and their constituency will fall right back in line.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on March 09, 2017, 09:33:47 PM
really just read a headline that said 'EPA chief pruitt doesn't believe CO2 is a primary contributor to global warming'




GOD

FVUCKING

DAMMIT
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 09, 2017, 10:28:19 PM
really just read a headline that said 'EPA chief pruitt doesn't believe CO2 is a primary contributor to global warming'




GOD

FVUCKING

DAMMIT

Time to play "Stupid or Liar"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on March 10, 2017, 12:06:07 AM
To be fair, if you don't believe in global warming, nothing would be a primary contributor to global warming.

You would hope that one of those people wouldn't be the head of the EPA, but welcome to Trumpland!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 10, 2017, 02:57:15 AM
To be fair, if you don't believe in global warming, nothing would be a primary contributor to global warming.

You would hope that one of those people wouldn't be the head of the EPA, but welcome to Trumpland!
Its all good.  Tommy can explain.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 10, 2017, 01:32:07 PM
We have an Education Secretary that believes guns belong in schools to protect against bear attacks. We have an FCC Chief who thinks Net Neutrality is bad. We have national security advisers who are in bed with Russia.

And people are shocked by an EPA head who denies the cause of climate change? Despite the fact that climate change denial is the official position of the administration?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on March 10, 2017, 05:22:49 PM
We have an Education Secretary that believes guns belong in schools to protect against bear attacks. We have an FCC Chief who thinks Net Neutrality is bad. We have national security advisers who are in bed with Russia.

And people are shocked by an EPA head who denies the cause of climate change? Despite the fact that climate change denial is the official position of the administration?

i am not shocked, i am fed up and done with this administration, as i have been for a long time
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 10, 2017, 08:29:40 PM
i am not shocked, i am fed up and done with this administration, as i have been for a long time
Honestly that was a highly sarcastic post to point out the absolute ridiculousness of the "drain the swamp" mantra nonsense.

Sure, Trump eliminated the administration members beholden to the lobbyists. He simply cut out all the middle men and gave the jobs directly to the lobbyers.

I'm with you. I'm done with even feigning benefit of the doubt. This guy is hot garbage.

Sent from my SCH-I605 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 12, 2017, 11:21:18 PM
http://www.wsj.com/articles/gop-health-plan-would-hit-rural-areas-hard-1489364405

Edit: Article is suddenly behind a paywall, but you can read the whole thing if you Google the headline and open it from there.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 13, 2017, 12:04:47 PM
http://www.wsj.com/articles/gop-health-plan-would-hit-rural-areas-hard-1489364405

Edit: Article is suddenly behind a paywall, but you can read the whole thing if you Google the headline and open it from there.

Quote
Rural regions' higher premiums are driven partly by a population that tends to be sicker and require costlier care, with higher rates of chronic conditions such as diabetes and heart disease, said April Todd, an executive at consulting firm Avalere Health, a unit of Inovalon Inc. Also, insurers often struggle to win price concessions from health-care providers who have few competitors, she said. "Given that they're the only hospital, you don't have a lot of negotiating leverage."

The analysis ignores one of the key parts of the new bill, which tackles this very problem. Allowing people in rural areas to buy insurance registered in different states, which would allow those in rural areas more options.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 13, 2017, 12:10:05 PM
The analysis ignores one of the key parts of the new bill, which tackles this very problem. Allowing people in rural areas to buy insurance registered in different states, which would allow those in rural areas more options.

Surely those out of state insurers are going to have the same problem though, or are you suggesting that people will have to go out of state to get treatment?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 13, 2017, 12:44:31 PM
Surely those out of state insurers are going to have the same problem though, or are you suggesting that people will have to go out of state to get treatment?
It's not going to matter.  Without subsidies or expanded medicaid most rural folks will never be able to afford health care anyway.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 13, 2017, 12:50:13 PM
It's not going to matter.  Without subsidies or expanded medicaid most rural folks will never be able to afford health care anyway.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



That may be so, but I was addressing Tommy's specific point which as far as I can tell (and I fully admit to my ignorance of much of the US health system) doesn't help with the issue of a lack of competing healthcare providers in rural regions resulting in higher costs to insurers and thus (presumably) higher premiums.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 13, 2017, 12:52:22 PM
Surely those out of state insurers are going to have the same problem though, or are you suggesting that people will have to go out of state to get treatment?

I'll admit that I don't know enough about the proposed plan to answer this question. Didn't have time to actually take a closer look at the document, so give me a few days.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 13, 2017, 01:24:34 PM
I'll admit that I don't know enough about the proposed plan to answer this question. Didn't have time to actually take a closer look at the document, so give me a few days.
Well, that puts you in the same boat as most republicans in congress that have no choice but to vote for this dumpster fire.  Why bother reading it?

The TLDR version of the bill is 15 million will lose health care while the uber rich will get uber richer.

Shocking, I know.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 13, 2017, 01:32:18 PM
Well, that puts you in the same boat as most republicans in congress that have no choice but to vote for this dumpster fire.  Why bother reading it?

The TLDR version of the bill is 15 million will lose health care while the uber rich will get uber richer.

Shocking, I know.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

I know proponents of Obamacare like to throw that number around, but that was the main point of the tax penalty for not having insurance. The mandate artificially increases the number of insured so those people who would otherwise opt out essentially had to get insurance. Now does that mean all 20 million are in that category? No, but a good majority are. Some people would rather have the extra cash. It's an obvious risk, but having a government mandate isn't cool.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 13, 2017, 01:58:08 PM
I know proponents of Obamacare like to throw that number around, but that was the main point of the tax penalty for not having insurance. The mandate artificially increases the number of insured so those people who would otherwise opt out essentially had to get insurance. Now does that mean all 20 million are in that category? No, but a good majority are. Some people would rather have the extra cash. It's an obvious risk, but having a government mandate isn't cool.

The problem is, the people who will opt will be the healthy (usually young). Those are the people who support the system. That's how all insurance works, those who don't collect support those who do.

Removing the mandate (which I completely despised when it was originally introduced) will make premiums/deductibles far more expensive for those who can least afford them (the older and the sick). It takes health insurance away from people. If not directly (as in the removal of pre-existing condition protection), at least effectively.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 13, 2017, 02:19:46 PM
The problem is, the people who will opt will be the healthy (usually young). Those are the people who support the system. That's how all insurance works, those who don't collect support those who do.

Removing the mandate (which I completely despised when it was originally introduced) will make premiums/deductibles far more expensive for those who can least afford them (the older and the sick). It takes health insurance away from people. If not directly (as in the removal of pre-existing condition protection), at least effectively.

Well then how do you explain the rising premiums even with the mandate?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 13, 2017, 02:32:21 PM
Well then how do you explain the rising premiums even with the mandate?

The greed of the health insurance providers?

Come on Tommy. I predicted exorbitant rising of premiums before the ACA ever made it into law. It wasn't hard to see it coming that the insurance companies would capitalize on the situation by pointing the finger at being forced to cover the "uninsurable." And that's exactly what they did.

Every other insurance industry works under the idea that those who don't collect subsidize those that do. Why do the healthcare insurers get to act like they're somehow different? That's how the argument for single-payer picks up legitimate steam.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 13, 2017, 02:34:41 PM
The greed of the health insurance providers?

Come on Tommy. I predicted exorbitant rising of premiums before the ACA ever made it into law. It wasn't hard to see it coming that the insurance companies would capitalize on the situation by pointing the finger at being forced to cover the "uninsurable." And that's exactly what they did.

Every other insurance industry works under the idea that those who don't collect subsidize those that do. Why do the healthcare insurers get to act like they're somehow different? That's how the argument for single-payer picks up legitimate steam.

That's fair, but if we're seeing that the ACA isn't doing what it was trying to accomplish in the first place, what's wrong with improving on that or making changes? We shouldn't have to take ACA as the be all and end all. Let's keep trying until we get it right.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 13, 2017, 02:38:28 PM
That's fair, but if we're seeing that the ACA isn't doing what it was trying to accomplish in the first place, what's wrong with improving on that or making changes? We shouldn't have to take ACA as the be all and end all. Let's keep trying until we get it right.

Because they're pretty clearly not improving it. At this point you can only debate whether this is a step back or standing pat. That's also how you can point out the liberals (millions will die!) and the true conservatives (this is just as bad as the ACA!).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 13, 2017, 02:39:33 PM
That's fair, but if we're seeing that the ACA isn't doing what it was trying to accomplish in the first place, what's wrong with improving on that or making changes? We shouldn't have to take ACA as the be all and end all. Let's keep trying until we get it right.

I've never thought the ACA was a good plan, so you'll get no argument from me there.

But the elimination of the mandate (especially coupled with the bonus of providers now being able to charge 5 times the premium, rather than 3) is almost as bad as removing the mandate to cover pre-existing conditions. Both exacerbate the same problem: making insurance coverage more expensive to those who can least afford it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 13, 2017, 03:25:09 PM
I know proponents of Obamacare like to throw that number around, but that was the main point of the tax penalty for not having insurance. The mandate artificially increases the number of insured so those people who would otherwise opt out essentially had to get insurance. Now does that mean all 20 million are in that category? No, but a good majority are. Some people would rather have the extra cash. It's an obvious risk, but having a government mandate isn't cool.
The vast majority of the people losing insurance will be poor and/or old due to the medicaid rollback.

The mandate issue is BS.  Most young people are either on their parents plan, were already insured because most universities already required it, get insurance through work, or just said freak it and paid the penalty.

Its a shame the mandate was included in the ACA, because it accomplised nothing but offer a talking point to the republican echo chamber.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 16, 2017, 08:20:50 PM
I'm putting this here because Fox.

http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/324399-sean-hannity-pointed-gun-at-juan-williams-report

My feelings about personal firearm ownership are well known, and even I know that the first two rules of firearms are:

1. Assume that every firearm is loaded

2. Never point a firearm at anything you don't intend to shoot

So don't you freaking dare trot out how freaking qualified he is to own a gun when he pulls excrement like this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 19, 2017, 10:02:15 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170320/f87d7ec2383141d901503cc8241a8e17.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2017, 10:58:18 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170320/f87d7ec2383141d901503cc8241a8e17.jpg)
Funny and obviously not a real quote, but Ayn Rand's rotting corpse can DIAFF.  I have no idea why libertarians tie themselves to her.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 20, 2017, 12:34:02 PM
Funny and obviously not a real quote, but Ayn Rand's rotting corpse can DIAFF.  I have no idea why libertarians tie themselves to her.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
I actually own a few of her books and old copies of her periodical The Objectivist. I get the appeal of libertarianism but it's possible to wake up and realize it may not be in ones own best interest. And acting in your own interests is the whole point of her philosphy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2017, 01:10:03 PM
I actually own a few of her books and old copies of her periodical The Objectivist. I get the appeal of libertarianism but it's possible to wake up and realize it may not be in ones own best interest. And acting in your own interests is the whole point of her philosphy.
That is exactly why I despise her.

I fully realize that everything around me means nothing.  The difference is that I understand that it means something to someone else.  For whatever reason, I care about the someones.  My self interest is meaningless.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 20, 2017, 01:12:09 PM
That is exactly why I despise her.

I fully realize that everything around me means nothing.  The difference is that I understand that it means something to someone else. For whatever reason, I care about the someones.  My self interest is meaningless.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



like Batman
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2017, 01:21:21 PM
like Batman
I only wish I could be so cool.

But in similar fashion, I would have blown my billions for sure.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2017, 01:28:11 PM
If you have the day off, the Russia hearing is interesting.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 20, 2017, 02:17:51 PM
That is exactly why I despise her.

I fully realize that everything around me means nothing.  The difference is that I understand that it means something to someone else.  For whatever reason, I care about the someones.  My self interest is meaningless.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



This is probably the biggest gap in the political spectrum. Far to one side, you have people who believe every man is responsible only for and to himself, and on the far other side, the belief is that we are all responsible to our community (local, state, federal, and planetary) above selfish motives. For whatever reason, it's somehow politically abhorrent to take the view that there could be a middle ground where we serve our own self-interests yet still care for others.

The easiest example is welfare. On one side, the belief is that the collective "I" have no responsibility to help someone who is poor because they should help themselves. On the other side, the belief is that we should help anyone who has less than average.

It's just one more way we're divided politically and can't come to a middle ground. And it's not accidental. Both ends are charged via emotion and neither side is "wrong." It's just ridiculous that the collective "we" allow ourselves to be split when there could be reasonable answers somewhere in the middle.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2017, 03:38:46 PM
I get labeled as a far left liberal.  I am not.  On behalf of moderates everywhere, I thank you for this post.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on March 20, 2017, 04:14:53 PM
Funny and obviously not a real quote, but Ayn Rand's rotting corpse can DIAFF.  I have no idea why libertarians tie themselves to her.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Libertarianism =/= objectivism, a lot of libertarians dont really like Ayn Rand
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2017, 04:34:43 PM
I get labeled as a far left liberal.  I am not.  On behalf of moderates everywhere, I thank you for this post.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


Lolok

In seriousness in the scope of the United States political spectrum you are absolutely quite a bit to the left.

I'm not gonna pretend to be an expert on your beliefs, but I don't see how anyone would consider you moderate.

I don't really know who on this board I'd truly consider the most moderate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2017, 08:11:36 PM
Lolok

In seriousness in the scope of the United States political spectrum you are absolutely quite a bit to the left.

I'm not gonna pretend to be an expert on your beliefs, but I don't see how anyone would consider you moderate.

I don't really know who on this board I'd truly consider the most moderate.
I am fiscally conservative, socially liberal.  The very definition of a moderate.

We just happen to focus on the social side here, so of course I understand.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2017, 08:26:41 PM
I am fiscally conservative, socially liberal.  The very definition of a moderate.

We just happen to focus on the social side here, so of course I understand.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



So youre against expanding medicare/medicaid/social security, against universal healthcare, and think all Americans including the wealthy and corporations deserve low taxes ?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 20, 2017, 11:36:11 PM
So youre against expanding medicare/medicaid/social security, against universal healthcare, and think all Americans including the wealthy and corporations deserve low taxes ?
Young one, you got that all messed up.

Social security and medicare are paid for by the workers.  It comes out of every paycheck and should have nothing to do with the federal budget.  You can thank the Reagan republicans for borrowing from it and turning the payback into mandatory spending.

Everyone has the right to healthcare.  Hospitals are legally bound to treat everyone that comes through the door.  We spend the most on healthcare by far.  The only rational path is single payer.  That would be the cheapest option by far, but a public option or medicaid for all would be more expensive, but would still save us billions.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on March 21, 2017, 03:06:38 AM
Young one, you got that all messed up.

Social security and medicare are paid for by the workers.  It comes out of every paycheck and should have nothing to do with the federal budget.  You can thank the Reagan republicans for borrowing from it and turning the payback into mandatory spending.

Everyone has the right to healthcare.  Hospitals are legally bound to treat everyone that comes through the door.  We spend the most on healthcare by far.  The only rational path is single payer.  That would be the cheapest option by far, but a public option or medicaid for all would be more expensive, but would still save us billions.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



"fiscally conservative"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 21, 2017, 07:40:37 AM
That is exactly why I despise her.

I fully realize that everything around me means nothing.  The difference is that I understand that it means something to someone else.  For whatever reason, I care about the someones.  My self interest is meaningless.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Don't get me wrong, pretty much everything I do or want is in my or my family's self-interest. It's just that I realized where those interests lie, especially after starting a family and finding my career. I didn't just swing from Gary Johnson to Bernie Sanders in four years by accident.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on March 21, 2017, 11:08:45 AM
I'm not gonna pretend to be an expert on your beliefs, but I don't see how anyone would consider you moderate.

In my peer group, I'm pretty sure he'd absolutely be considered a moderate. Speaking as someone who ideologically occupies the left wing, most posters here seem to swing from relatively moderate to minarchist sympathizing libertarian types.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 21, 2017, 11:52:49 AM
Being a moderate implies that you agree with one side on some issues, and the other side on others. If you're consistently bashing one side and aligning yourself with the Left on virtually every issue, then you can't possibly call yourself a "moderate". Not saying that's a bad thing, it's just what you are.

Also, political positions aren't black and white. I'm Right-wing on many things, but Left-wing on others. I consider Healthcare a right, I'm pro-choice, I don't have an issue with gay marriage, but I draw the line at the transgender thing, and I do support states having a say when it comes to certain social issues. The fact that everyone needs to be labeled is the reason why this country is so fragmented today.

Also, as Badger has said, life events can and will change your political positions. I was vehemently against abortion until I got one of my first girlfriend pregnant when I was 18, then pulled a 180 on that issue. I was a borderline communist in High School until I learned how the real world works and doesn't work. I'm a strong believer in providing people with options, choices, and incentives to work hard rather than having the government provide everything. When my parents agreed to a Parents Plus Loan, I naturally picked a nice expensive school with all the bells and whistles. When they took that away, I made the smarter choice of working part time/and full time while enrolling in a much cheaper school. When the government provides for people there's very little incentive to go out and earn for yourself, as it's very easy to get comfortable in a particular income level. Safety nets are fine, but they should just be temporary.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on March 21, 2017, 12:51:25 PM
Being a moderate implies that you agree with one side on some issues, and the other side on others. If you're consistently bashing one side and aligning yourself with the Left on virtually every issue, then you can't possibly call yourself a "moderate". Not saying that's a bad thing, it's just what you are.

The issue with labeling any American politician as "the Left" is that it ignores a tremendous spectrum of political beliefs and practices.

While the classic 'political compass' test has its flaws, looking at public policy positions, I generally agree with their depiction of the 2016 presidential race:

(https://www.politicalcompass.org/images/us2016.png)

Idealistically, I will always fall at the very bottom left corner of that spectrum - in American politics, in lieu of me having a single party or politician I have ever supported the policies of, I tend to support those I believe will simply do the least harm to the most people around the world.

Quote
The fact that everyone needs to be labeled is the reason why this country is so fragmented today.

Source? It's these types of unsubstantiated generalizations that I find baffling about political discourse.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on March 21, 2017, 03:13:56 PM
Didn't think this deserved it's own thread but:

Comey admits under oath that he hates the Patriots. (http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/fbi-director-james-comey-admits-under-oath-that-he-hates-the-patriots-032017)

Quote
“I hate the New England Patriots,” Comey said. “No matter who they play, I’d like them to lose. And I’m at the same time rooting against the Patriots and hoping their opponent beat them because there’s only two teams on the field.”
“By the way if I’m honest with myself the reason I don’t like the Patriots is they represent sustained excellence, and as a Giants fan that drives me crazy,” said Comey, whose comment was greeted by chuckles from the committee.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 21, 2017, 04:04:20 PM
Being a moderate implies that you agree with one side on some issues, and the other side on others. If you're consistently bashing one side and aligning yourself with the Left on virtually every issue, then you can't possibly call yourself a "moderate". Not saying that's a bad thing, it's just what you are.

Also, political positions aren't black and white. I'm Right-wing on many things, but Left-wing on others. I consider Healthcare a right, I'm pro-choice, I don't have an issue with gay marriage, but I draw the line at the transgender thing, and I do support states having a say when it comes to certain social issues. The fact that everyone needs to be labeled is the reason why this country is so fragmented today.

Also, as Badger has said, life events can and will change your political positions. I was vehemently against abortion until I got one of my first girlfriend pregnant when I was 18, then pulled a 180 on that issue. I was a borderline communist in High School until I learned how the real world works and doesn't work. I'm a strong believer in providing people with options, choices, and incentives to work hard rather than having the government provide everything. When my parents agreed to a Parents Plus Loan, I naturally picked a nice expensive school with all the bells and whistles. When they took that away, I made the smarter choice of working part time/and full time while enrolling in a much cheaper school. When the government provides for people there's very little incentive to go out and earn for yourself, as it's very easy to get comfortable in a particular income level. Safety nets are fine, but they should just be temporary.
I agree with smaller government, just not randomly smaller just for the sake of it.  There is certainly an efficiency problem in DC.

I believe in some semblance of a flat tax, would rather close tax loopholes than do the progressive tax/deductions song and dance, and would shut down the IRS for good.

I would cut military spending in half.

I would make medicaid a right for every person.  If insurance companies want to compete for customers after that, have at it.

A free community college option should be available.

2 years of public service, be it military or something else, gets you a free university ride.

K-12, or maybe even 14, should be handled at the state level.  Running education from DC just isn't working.

No state should get more money back from DC than it contributes in federal taxes.

The federal budget should be balanced every year.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 21, 2017, 05:02:59 PM
Didn't think this deserved it's own thread but:

Comey admits under oath that he hates the Patriots. (http://www.foxsports.com/nfl/story/fbi-director-james-comey-admits-under-oath-that-he-hates-the-patriots-032017)
Can we get him at the tailgate?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 22, 2017, 12:04:59 AM
Can we get him at the tailgate?
Comey is a queynte, but Pats hate is always appreciated.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 22, 2017, 09:08:56 AM
I agree with smaller government, just not randomly smaller just for the sake of it.  There is certainly an efficiency problem in DC.

I believe in some semblance of a flat tax, would rather close tax loopholes than do the progressive tax/deductions song and dance, and would shut down the IRS for good.

I don't think anyone wants a "randomly smaller government". When people want smaller government, they want less taxes, less regulations, and less federal say over what people/states can do. And we all know how incredibly inefficient the government is and most of its institutions. Having sold to government institutions, they simply do.not.care.about.price. It's insane. Hardly any negotiations. All they have to do is have at least a few firms compete, and they usually choose the cheapest, but if you want someone to pay list price: sell to any government agency. excrement, I had the CIA as a client and they paid us $4 million for a product that most other firms paid like $50k. Having a budget director who actually wants to cut costs is not a bad thing.

Quote
I would cut military spending in half.

What does this mean? Reduce our standing army? Our navy? Military research? I'm all for closing our overseas bases, especially in Germany, Italy, and Japan, but ensuring we have a turn-key military that can achieve air and sea dominance in any potential conflict is important to our national security and interests. A large military isn't just a defense mechanism, but also an incredibly useful negotiation tool. Besides, military spending (even with Trump's proposed increase) will be a little under than $600 billion, which is less than 15% of our total budget. (Our outlays this year is about $3.7 trillion).

Quote
I would make medicaid a right for every person.  If insurance companies want to compete for customers after that, have at it.

Medicare and Medicaid is already accessible to the vast majority of the population, especially those in lower income classes. We also spend more than $1 trillion of our budget on this. It's incredibly inefficient. Canada and the UK spend a fraction of that per citizen and have a single-payer option. We need to reform our entire healthcare system, not expand it.

Quote
A free community college option should be available.

Community colleges are paid for by the state, not federal government. If you want to pay more in Nevada state taxes so that kids can go to community college for free, go right ahead and petition your governor for it. Also, states suck at budgeting for schools. So does the government. In NYC they had Open Admissions for CUNY until the 90s, which meant anyone regardless of grades can get into any of the 4-year schools. That reduced the value of the education, and just filled the schools up with kids who didn't even want to be there. CUNY was much better off once they got rid of that, and though they did raise costs, it's still very affordable even if you're working at $9/hour, like I was when I paid my way at Queens College.

Quote
2 years of public service, be it military or something else, gets you a free university ride.

The U.S military already provides tuition assistance to active members. Not a loan, but they actually pay your tuition. Also, if you're in the military, you can save enough to pay for any community college or state school once discharged.

Quote
K-12, or maybe even 14, should be handled at the state level.  Running education from DC just isn't working.

I agree, and it's mostly run by the municipalities anyway, which is why counties with higher tax rates have better public schools. And also why public schools in rich neighborhoods get more money.

Quote
No state should get more money back from DC than it contributes in federal taxes.

No argument here.

Quote
The federal budget should be balanced every year.

Well I feel the same way, but you sure do seem to want the government to spend MORE money on the things you think will help people, and think that by cutting military spending we can balance the budget. False. Besides, the national debt really isn't that big of a deal as most make it out to be. U.S debt provides a safe investment vehicle for everyone, because, let's face it, if we go down everyone does.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 22, 2017, 09:31:47 AM
I don't think anyone wants a "randomly smaller government". When people want smaller government, they want less taxes, less regulations, and less federal say over what people/states can do. And we all know how incredibly inefficient the government is and most of its institutions. Having sold to government institutions, they simply do.not.care.about.price. It's insane. Hardly any negotiations. All they have to do is have at least a few firms compete, and they usually choose the cheapest, but if you want someone to pay list price: sell to any government agency. excrement, I had the CIA as a client and they paid us $4 million for a product that most other firms paid like $50k. Having a budget director who actually wants to cut costs is not a bad thing.

What does this mean? Reduce our standing army? Our navy? Military research? I'm all for closing our overseas bases, especially in Germany, Italy, and Japan, but ensuring we have a turn-key military that can achieve air and sea dominance in any potential conflict is important to our national security and interests. A large military isn't just a defense mechanism, but also an incredibly useful negotiation tool. Besides, military spending (even with Trump's proposed increase) will be a little under than $600 billion, which is less than 15% of our total budget. (Our outlays this year is about $3.7 trillion).

Medicare and Medicaid is already accessible to the vast majority of the population, especially those in lower income classes. We also spend more than $1 trillion of our budget on this. It's incredibly inefficient. Canada and the UK spend a fraction of that per citizen and have a single-payer option. We need to reform our entire healthcare system, not expand it.

Community colleges are paid for by the state, not federal government. If you want to pay more in Nevada state taxes so that kids can go to community college for free, go right ahead and petition your governor for it. Also, states suck at budgeting for schools. So does the government. In NYC they had Open Admissions for CUNY until the 90s, which meant anyone regardless of grades can get into any of the 4-year schools. That reduced the value of the education, and just filled the schools up with kids who didn't even want to be there. CUNY was much better off once they got rid of that, and though they did raise costs, it's still very affordable even if you're working at $9/hour, like I was when I paid my way at Queens College.

The U.S military already provides tuition assistance to active members. Not a loan, but they actually pay your tuition. Also, if you're in the military, you can save enough to pay for any community college or state school once discharged.

I agree, and it's mostly run by the municipalities anyway, which is why counties with higher tax rates have better public schools. And also why public schools in rich neighborhoods get more money.

No argument here.

Well I feel the same way, but you sure do seem to want the government to spend MORE money on the things you think will help people, and think that by cutting military spending we can balance the budget. False. Besides, the national debt really isn't that big of a deal as most make it out to be. U.S debt provides a safe investment vehicle for everyone, because, let's face it, if we go down everyone does.
I was really just trying to show that I am not a far left liberal.  I think we agree on more than you thought.

When you have a military that can destroy the entire world at any moment five times over, it might be time to pump the breaks on military spending a bit.

Sick people produce zero tax revenue.  Whether it's medicaid, single payer, or public option, the country needs to pick one.  Insurance companies making billions while people die for no reason is not the solution.  More healthy people equals more tax dollars.

If raising the minimum wage is not an option, how about people making less than 15 an hour pay no federal taxes?  The rest of us pay 25% with no deductions, no loopholes.  Both numbers are obviously just spit balling, but you get the idea.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on March 22, 2017, 09:36:40 AM
I was really just trying to show that I am not a far left liberal.  I think we agree on more than you thought.

When you have a military that can destroy the entire world at any moment five times over, it might be time to pump the breaks on military spending a bit.

Sick people produce zero tax revenue.  Whether it's medicaid, single payer, or public option, the country needs to pick one.  Insurance companies making billions while people die for no reason is not the solution.  More healthy people equals more tax dollars.

If raising the minimum wage is not an option, how about people making less than 15 an hour pay no federal taxes?  The rest of us pay 25% with no deductions, no loopholes.  Both numbers are obviously just spit balling, but you get the idea.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



That would mean a lot of people making just above 15 would be far better off taking a pay cut and getting to the no tax bracket.

Or maybe I'm being dumb and it would only be the money above $15 that gets taxed. So someone making just above is only paying tax on the dollar or two extra.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 22, 2017, 09:42:38 AM
That would mean a lot of people making just above 15 would be far better off taking a pay cut and getting to the no tax bracket.
Totally true.  Thats why I said 'spit balling'.  The % would have to slowly go up to the flat rate.  Anything above 20 an hour would even out.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 22, 2017, 10:03:29 AM
Totally true.  Thats why I said 'spit balling'.  The % would have to slowly go up to the flat rate.  Anything above 20 an hour would even out.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



I'm 100% for a flat tax rate for anyone earning above $30k/etc, and an end to deductions. Everyone pays 15% and no deductions, which means no more H&R block and all this other crap people have to deal with to get as much money back as possible. Doing so would put more money in people's pockets each paycheck, help us reduce costs generated by the IRS and audits/etc, and everyone will be far better off in the long run. It'll also encourage people to contribute to a ROTH IRA or other form of retirement account, or to save, or to spend. Either way the economy as a whole benefits.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 22, 2017, 10:05:11 AM
I was really just trying to show that I am not a far left liberal.  I think we agree on more than you thought.

When you have a military that can destroy the entire world at any moment five times over, it might be time to pump the breaks on military spending a bit.

Sick people produce zero tax revenue.  Whether it's medicaid, single payer, or public option, the country needs to pick one.  Insurance companies making billions while people die for no reason is not the solution.  More healthy people equals more tax dollars.

If raising the minimum wage is not an option, how about people making less than 15 an hour pay no federal taxes?  The rest of us pay 25% with no deductions, no loopholes.  Both numbers are obviously just spit balling, but you get the idea.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



One of the biggest reasons for the increase in defense spending is that when you have a massive military, the equipment depreciates and needs to be replaced/upgraded. I do agree that we can trim the costs down, but just veteran pensions/etc alone account for 1/5th of the spending.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 22, 2017, 10:23:14 AM
One of the biggest reasons for the increase in defense spending is that when you have a massive military, the equipment depreciates and needs to be replaced/upgraded. I do agree that we can trim the costs down, but just veteran pensions/etc alone account for 1/5th of the spending.
Good point on vet benefits, and I was not aware that it was 20% of military spending, if your number is accurate.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 22, 2017, 10:57:38 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2011/oct/14/alabama-immigration-law-workers
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 22, 2017, 11:35:06 AM
http://propub.li/2mPHqdu
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 22, 2017, 11:48:49 AM
http://propub.li/2mPHqdu

BUT DEATH PANELS
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 22, 2017, 01:37:22 PM
You guys posting real excrement that Tommy will deny, when I think I might been having a rational conversation with him.

Worst intervention ever.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 22, 2017, 01:43:49 PM
I'm 100% for a flat tax rate for anyone earning above $30k/etc, and an end to deductions. Everyone pays 15% and no deductions, which means no more H&R block and all this other crap people have to deal with to get as much money back as possible. Doing so would put more money in people's pockets each paycheck, help us reduce costs generated by the IRS and audits/etc, and everyone will be far better off in the long run. It'll also encourage people to contribute to a ROTH IRA or other form of retirement account, or to save, or to spend. Either way the economy as a whole benefits.
15% wouldn't cut it.  I'm fine with pretax deductions for health care and retirement related bits, as long as the IRS DIAFF, but 25% seems like a more reasonable rate.

If you make 1 million, you could live without 250k.  If you make 40k and invest in health care and retirement, you probably pay nothing, but save the country a fortune in the long term.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 22, 2017, 01:45:02 PM
You guys posting real excrement that Tommy will deny, when I think I might been having a rational conversation with him.

Worst intervention ever.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



I read the entire thing, and there is a bunch of misleading information being passed down to constituents from BOTH SIDES. Politicians being politicians. I'm not shocked.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 22, 2017, 01:51:18 PM
15% wouldn't cut it.  I'm fine with pretax deductions for health care and retirement related bits, as long as the IRS DIAFF, but 25% seems like a more reasonable rate.

If you make 1 million, you could live without 250k.  If you make 40k and invest in health care and retirement, you probably pay nothing, but save the country a fortune in the long term.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Why won't 15% cut it?

There was close to $16 trillion in earned income in the U.S last year. 15% of all earned income is about $2.4 trillion dollars. And that's just taxes on personal income, not corporate taxes or others, which would more than cover the ones making less than $40k and what's in our current budget.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 22, 2017, 01:56:06 PM
Why won't 15% cut it?

There was close to $16 trillion in earned income in the U.S last year. 15% of all earned income is about $2.4 trillion dollars. And that's just taxes on personal income, not corporate taxes or others, which would more than cover the ones making less than $40k and what's in our current budget.
Fair argument.  But I want 0 deficit.  I know you are a Reagan guy, but I want a balanced budget.  The flat tax could change every year for all I care.  It would give our vote real power.  You could vote for tax and spend republicans, or member when we had a surplus democrats.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 22, 2017, 02:03:57 PM
Fair argument.  But I want 0 deficit.  I know you are a Reagan guy, but I want a balanced budget.  The flat tax could change every year for all I care.  It would give our vote real power.  You could vote for tax and spend republicans, or member when we had a surplus democrats.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


I'd say both sides are pretty even when it comes to being a little spend-happy with the budget:
https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

Why do you want a balanced budget anyway? Just curious. When a country has a deficit, they issue debt, which is the most liquid and safe debt in the world, and everyone buys the bonds. How exactly would your life change for the better if the next 4 years were completely balanced?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 22, 2017, 02:08:24 PM
And for the under 40 crowd, I grew up under MAD.  I was too young to see what Reagan was actually doing.

In retrospect, he used the cold war as a veil to transfer massive amounts of wealth to the already wealthy.  He did it by introducing deficit spending because 'the cold war'. 

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 22, 2017, 02:09:59 PM
I'd say both sides are pretty even when it comes to being a little spend-happy with the budget:
https://www.thebalance.com/us-debt-by-president-by-dollar-and-percent-3306296

Why do you want a balanced budget anyway? Just curious. When a country has a deficit, they issue debt, which is the most liquid and safe debt in the world, and everyone buys the bonds. How exactly would your life change for the better if the next 4 years were completely balanced?
The middle class was a great place to be before the country decided freak it.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 22, 2017, 02:12:43 PM
My life wouldn't change at all, and I don't have kids, but for some stupid reason I care about the future of this country.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 22, 2017, 02:14:52 PM
And for the under 40 crowd, I grew up under MAD.  I was too young to see what Reagan was actually doing.

In retrospect, he used the cold war as a veil to transfer massive amounts of wealth to the already wealthy.  He did it by introducing deficit spending because 'the cold war'. 

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



...but reduced poverty?

(http://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/11-7-16pov.png)

Yeah, rich people made money in the 80s and 90s. So what?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 22, 2017, 02:15:52 PM
My life wouldn't change at all, and I don't have kids, but for some stupid reason I care about the future of this country.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



But can you give me examples of how our future would be fucked unless we balance our budget every year?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 22, 2017, 02:35:35 PM
But can you give me examples of how our future would be fucked unless we balance our budget every year?

-You have to pay interest on the debt, which is more debt with no benefit.  If I bought some shoes on a credit card, I got shoes out of the debt.  When I start paying interest on the credit card, I start accruing debt with no benefit.

-At some point, our debt will be so high that our creditors will become leery that we will repay them.  Then interest rates go up.  More debt.  This isn't an issue now, but when will it be?

-This isn't a problem right now, and it's political suicide to try to tighten the belt of the country.  However, it will be a problem in the not-so-distant future if we don't at least reign it in some.  I'm not saying the US needs to reduce the debt to zero, but having the deficit getting worse every year will be a problem.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 22, 2017, 04:18:42 PM
...but reduced poverty?

(http://www.cbpp.org/sites/default/files/atoms/files/11-7-16pov.png)

Yeah, rich people made money in the 80s and 90s. So what?
I'm a numbers guy.  I can make a graph to show anything you want.  Hell, your side made graphs to show Obama hates poor people.

Let's rise above that.

It is absolutely clear and undeniable that Reagan introduced deficit spending, bloated our military to an unsustainable level, and was responsible for the largest wealth redistribution in the history of the world.

It is not working.  It never trickled down.  It has gone beyond politics.  Citizens United made that clear.  Our country is now owned by a handful of billionaires.

If you are OK with that, cool.  I hope you scavenge what you can and have a nice life.  I really do.

Some of us would prefer to not see this country continue as an oligarchy.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 22, 2017, 04:31:00 PM
I'm a numbers guy.  I can make a graph to show anything you want.  Hell, your side made graphs to show Obama hates poor people.

Let's rise above that.

It is absolutely clear and undeniable that Reagan introduced deficit spending, bloated our military to an unsustainable level, and was responsible for the largest wealth redistribution in the history of the world.

It is not working.  It never trickled down.  It has gone beyond politics.  Citizens United made that clear.  Our country is now owned by a handful of billionaires.

If you are OK with that, cool.  I hope you scavenge what you can and have a nice life.  I really do.

Some of us would prefer to not see this country continue as an oligarchy.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Please stop using the term "trickle down", it belittles both of us and doesn't add anything of substance. It's just a talking point used by the other side who were against Reagan's policies.

You have to understand why Reagan did what he did. The 1970s were an absolute mess. The country was not doing well, and we were suffering from stagnant growth and inflation (not a good combo). After the oil crisis, unemployment shot up, but eventually moved down towards full employment by the late-80s. Progress. Investments poured into this country (remember that whole "The Japanese are taking over" thing?) and faith in the markets picked up. Progress. The rise in defense spending forced the USSR to basically bankrupt itself and implode, leaving us the lone world's Super Power. Progress. Innovation flourished, and so did startups because of increases in investments. Computers, all of that. Progress. By the end of Reagan's term we were on our way to becoming the lone economic and military super power, and we haven't looked back since.

Did the wealth distribute to levels that people like you would be happy with? It didn't, but the opportunity to take what you can get is there, and everything we've seen since the 80s are great examples. All the innovation, startups, wealth, everything.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 22, 2017, 05:01:59 PM
Please stop using the term "trickle down", it belittles both of us and doesn't add anything of substance. It's just a talking point used by the other side who were against Reagan's policies.

You have to understand why Reagan did what he did. The 1970s were an absolute mess. The country was not doing well, and we were suffering from stagnant growth and inflation (not a good combo). After the oil crisis, unemployment shot up, but eventually moved down towards full employment by the late-80s. Progress. Investments poured into this country (remember that whole "The Japanese are taking over" thing?) and faith in the markets picked up. Progress. The rise in defense spending forced the USSR to basically bankrupt itself and implode, leaving us the lone world's Super Power. Progress. Innovation flourished, and so did startups because of increases in investments. Computers, all of that. Progress. By the end of Reagan's term we were on our way to becoming the lone economic and military super power, and we haven't looked back since.

Did the wealth distribute to levels that people like you would be happy with? It didn't, but the opportunity to take what you can get is there, and everything we've seen since the 80s are great examples. All the innovation, startups, wealth, everything.
You started that by calling trickle down a talking point, then ended with take what you can?  Wow.  OK.

They are going to make a shitty sequal to your life starring Mila Kunis.

The world, not just the US, was coming out of a pretty fucked up time in the 70's.  You know, war and stuff.  We had a decent man as president, but he wasn't a war guy.  He got bounced and we got a guy that loved war, and apparently loved Saudi Arabian oil even more.  Not to mention he was slowly losing his mind.

He then abolished the concept of fiscal conservatism and created the national debt that tea party folks, who love him, want to get rid of.  I do too, but wtf?

He then set out to take as much money as he could from the middle class to create a ruling class, and told us all the while the money would trickle down.

His words, not mine.  It didn't happen, and here we are trying to clean up the mess.

Reagan republicans under 40 are the worst.  The revisionist history knows no bounds.  He was a fraud.  He was a B movie actor slowly succumbing to Alzheimer's.  He set the economy, and our country back a century.

It sucks when less than 30 years later, it's happening again.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 22, 2017, 08:58:47 PM
You started that by calling trickle down a talking point, then ended with take what you can?  Wow.  OK.

They are going to make a shitty sequal to your life starring Mila Kunis.

The world, not just the US, was coming out of a pretty fucked up time in the 70's.  You know, war and stuff.  We had a decent man as president, but he wasn't a war guy.  He got bounced and we got a guy that loved war, and apparently loved Saudi Arabian oil even more.  Not to mention he was slowly losing his mind.

He then abolished the concept of fiscal conservatism and created the national debt that tea party folks, who love him, want to get rid of.  I do too, but wtf?

He then set out to take as much money as he could from the middle class to create a ruling class, and told us all the while the money would trickle down.

His words, not mine.  It didn't happen, and here we are trying to clean up the mess.

Reagan republicans under 40 are the worst.  The revisionist history knows no bounds.  He was a fraud.  He was a B movie actor slowly succumbing to Alzheimer's.  He set the economy, and our country back a century.

It sucks when less than 30 years later, it's happening again.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

K
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 22, 2017, 09:09:46 PM
You started that by calling trickle down a talking point, then ended with take what you can?  Wow.  OK.

They are going to make a shitty sequal to your life starring Mila Kunis.

The world, not just the US, was coming out of a pretty fucked up time in the 70's.  You know, war and stuff.  We had a decent man as president, but he wasn't a war guy.  He got bounced and we got a guy that loved war, and apparently loved Saudi Arabian oil even more.  Not to mention he was slowly losing his mind.

He then abolished the concept of fiscal conservatism and created the national debt that tea party folks, who love him, want to get rid of.  I do too, but wtf?

He then set out to take as much money as he could from the middle class to create a ruling class, and told us all the while the money would trickle down.

His words, not mine.  It didn't happen, and here we are trying to clean up the mess.

Reagan republicans under 40 are the worst.  The revisionist history knows no bounds.  He was a fraud.  He was a B movie actor slowly succumbing to Alzheimer's.  He set the economy, and our country back a century.

It sucks when less than 30 years later, it's happening again.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Im no historian and wont pretend to be even close to good at having a thorough understanding of the overwhelming majority of presidents and their accomplishments. But a quick google search and on many polls/rankings by both regular people and historians Reagan is frequently listed as one of the best presidents in the history of this country.

Now I realize that the American people are ignorant uneducated freaking morons who don't know anything and will gladly voice strong opinions on these matters (this applies equally to both sides of the political spectrum), but I have to imagine that presidential historians know at least a little bit about this stuff.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 22, 2017, 10:15:59 PM
Im no historian and wont pretend to be even close to good at having a thorough understanding of the overwhelming majority of presidents and their accomplishments. But a quick google search and on many polls/rankings by both regular people and historians Reagan is frequently listed as one of the best presidents in the history of this country.

Now I realize that the American people are ignorant uneducated freaking morons who don't know anything and will gladly voice strong opinions on these matters (this applies equally to both sides of the political spectrum), but I have to imagine that presidential historians know at least a little bit about this stuff.



Recency, although he's better than the last 5 douche bags we have had. He got lucky, he had Volker and the beginning of Greenspan. Interest rates went from the very high teens to mid single digits. That's a huge move in 8 years. That alone could cement his legacy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 22, 2017, 10:24:51 PM
Im no historian and wont pretend to be even close to good at having a thorough understanding of the overwhelming majority of presidents and their accomplishments. But a quick google search and on many polls/rankings by both regular people and historians Reagan is frequently listed as one of the best presidents in the history of this country.

Now I realize that the American people are ignorant uneducated freaking morons who don't know anything and will gladly voice strong opinions on these matters (this applies equally to both sides of the political spectrum), but I have to imagine that presidential historians know at least a little bit about this stuff.
Reagan was not the worst president by any means, but even your simple google searches should give you something to understand why I do not care for him.

He gets a ton of credit for toppling the Soviet Union.  He was in the right place at the right time when Gorbachev came along.  He didn't screw it up.  Kuddos.

Meanwhile, he waged proxy wars in the middle east.  He trained and armed Bin Laden.  He went all in on Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Let's not even get started on Iran/Contra.  The man should have been impeached.

He created he who dies with the most toys wins.  Not the actual saying, but the mentality.

His wife started the war on drugs, which targeted black men smoking pot, while white business men were doing enough coke to fund the entire Escobar regime.  While he supported for profit prisons to keep the pot smokers in.

He changed regulations and tax policies to make the rich become ultra rich, and maybe he truly thought the extra revenue would go to the middle class.  History tells us how that worked out.  Unions crushed, right to work states, our middle class decimated.

The more I dig, the more I might have to alter the first line of this post.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on March 23, 2017, 02:42:28 AM
Reagan was not the worst president by any means, but even your simple google searches should give you something to understand why I do not care for him.

He gets a ton of credit for toppling the Soviet Union.  He was in the right place at the right time when Gorbachev came along.  He didn't screw it up.  Kuddos.

Meanwhile, he waged proxy wars in the middle east.  He trained and armed Bin Laden.  He went all in on Saudi Arabia and Israel.

Let's not even get started on Iran/Contra.  The man should have been impeached.

He created he who dies with the most toys wins.  Not the actual saying, but the mentality.

His wife started the war on drugs, which targeted black men smoking pot, while white business men were doing enough coke to fund the entire Escobar regime.  While he supported for profit prisons to keep the pot smokers in.

He changed regulations and tax policies to make the rich become ultra rich, and maybe he truly thought the extra revenue would go to the middle class.  History tells us how that worked out.  Unions crushed, right to work states, our middle class decimated.

The more I dig, the more I might have to alter the first line of this post.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

WTF is this block of excrement? You're just spewing talking points from the Left. You're a shill for them whether you think so or not. You're not making an ounce of sense, and your mind has clearly been made up years ago and will never change. It's absolutely pointless to argue your points, as you'll immediately dismiss them as fast as you embrace political bukkake like this. freak off. I'm done talking politics with you. And anyone for that matter. I'm going to stick to the Jets and other excrement. As Bo mentioned numerous times, this is pointless.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on March 23, 2017, 04:11:06 AM
WTF is this block of excrement? You're just spewing talking points from the Left. You're a shill for them whether you think so or not. You're not making an ounce of sense, and your mind has clearly been made up years ago and will never change. It's absolutely pointless to argue your points, as you'll immediately dismiss them as fast as you embrace political bukkake like this. freak off. I'm done talking politics with you. And anyone for that matter. I'm going to stick to the Jets and other excrement. As Bo mentioned numerous times, this is pointless.

See you back in this thread tomorrow!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on March 23, 2017, 06:10:29 AM
When KellyAnne is led out of the WH in handcuffs and then convicted, Tommyanne will still be ready, willing and able to defend TRAITOR TRUMP
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 23, 2017, 08:36:30 AM
See you back in this thread tomorrow!

X 2
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 23, 2017, 08:54:08 AM
Tommy cracked like an egg. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on March 23, 2017, 08:55:46 AM
"politcal bukkake"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 23, 2017, 08:57:56 AM
Rick's?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on March 23, 2017, 08:59:41 AM
"politcal bukkake"

lmao I'm going to borrow this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 23, 2017, 09:13:45 AM
The Kochs are pledging cash support to Republicans who vote against the AHCA since they're being threatened with primary competitors if they don't fall in line and vote for the turd. Not so much because the bill is horrible, but because it's not the full repeal that was promised.

So basically they're using bad means (unlimited political contibutions) to do a good thing (defeat the AHCA) for bad reasons (full repeal of ACA).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 23, 2017, 09:50:11 AM
WTF is this block of excrement? You're just spewing talking points from the Left. You're a shill for them whether you think so or not. You're not making an ounce of sense, and your mind has clearly been made up years ago and will never change. It's absolutely pointless to argue your points, as you'll immediately dismiss them as fast as you embrace political bukkake like this. freak off. I'm done talking politics with you. And anyone for that matter. I'm going to stick to the Jets and other excrement. As Bo mentioned numerous times, this is pointless.
Refute a single thing I said.  These are not talking points.  These are facts that  I learned over time.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 23, 2017, 09:52:05 AM
The Kochs are pledging cash support to Republicans who vote against the AHCA since they're being threatened with primary competitors if they don't fall in line and vote for the turd. Not so much because the bill is horrible, but because it's not the full repeal that was promised.

So basically they're using bad means (unlimited political contibutions) to do a good thing (defeat the AHCA) for bad reasons (full repeal of ACA).
Crazy world it is.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 23, 2017, 10:06:42 AM
The Kochs are pledging cash support to Republicans who vote against the AHCA since they're being threatened with primary competitors if they don't fall in line and vote for the turd. Not so much because the bill is horrible, but because it's not the full repeal that was promised.

So basically they're using bad means (unlimited political contibutions) to do a good thing (defeat the AHCA) for bad reasons (full repeal of ACA).

Yep.  I feel like Democrats will celebrate when this thing doesn't pass (and it won't unless there are some big last minute changes to it), but they really shouldn't because the next one that one that comes along will be even more extreme to Democrats.  Like you said, this one will get rejected because it isn't conservative enough, not because fiscal conservatives had a change of heart.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 23, 2017, 11:02:33 AM
Yep.  I feel like Democrats will celebrate when this thing doesn't pass (and it won't unless there are some big last minute changes to it), but they really shouldn't because the next one that one that comes along will be even more extreme to Democrats.  Like you said, this one will get rejected because it isn't conservative enough, not because fiscal conservatives had a change of heart.
The thing is they can't pass a sufficiently conservative healthcare law without totally freaking up their voter base and getting ousted in their next election.

Something's gotta give.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 23, 2017, 11:26:16 AM
Refute a single thing I said.  These are not talking points.  These are facts that  I learned over time.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


While I'm not interested in spending my time researching and refuting your points, I think it's pretty clear that very little said on this thread is "facts" and your extremely biased "moderate" gibberish is no different
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 23, 2017, 11:28:26 AM
The thing is they can't pass a sufficiently conservative healthcare law without totally freaking up their voter base and getting ousted in their next election.

Something's gotta give.

I think that's true, but historically anyone who tried to reform healthcare has gotten absolutely crushed for it. Obamacare is failing majorly, and being associated with it hurts the left. And unfortunately for the Republicans they can't just repeal it and do nothing, which is their preference
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 24, 2017, 06:15:59 AM
I'll give Trump credit, from a political standpoint it's a pretty shrewd move to tell the rest of the Republicans to either vote for his bill or the ACA will be left in place.  Of course it'll give him someone else to blame if it doesn't pass, but it puts the pressure back on House Republicans to have to face their conservative constituents after having not voted to repeal and replace the ACA like they promised.

I bet you'll have a few of those Freedom Caucus members crack and say yes at the last minute, but I don't think it will be enough to pass.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 24, 2017, 08:24:03 AM
I'll give Trump credit, from a political standpoint it's a pretty shrewd move to tell the rest of the Republicans to either vote for his bill or the ACA will be left in place.  Of course it'll give him someone else to blame if it doesn't pass, but it puts the pressure back on House Republicans to have to face their conservative constituents after having not voted to repeal and replace the ACA like they promised.

I bet you'll have a few of those Freedom Caucus members crack and say yes at the last minute, but I don't think it will be enough to pass.

Feel free to take this with a grain of salt because admittedly if I had my way, we'd have President Paul right now, but even the lesser known members of the Freedom Caucus, the Lee's the Massie's...those guys are incredibly loyal to constituency and ideology. Point being, I bet they don't.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 24, 2017, 02:04:39 PM
While I'm not interested in spending my time researching and refuting your points, I think it's pretty clear that very little said on this thread is "facts" and your extremely biased "moderate" gibberish is no different
A, my response was to Tommy.

B, if you want to speak for Tommy at least refute something.

C, you were still shitting yourself when the guy was president, if you were even alive.  Do not try me on 80s politics.  You will lose.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 24, 2017, 02:11:06 PM
Feel free to take this with a grain of salt because admittedly if I had my way, we'd have President Paul right now, but even the lesser known members of the Freedom Caucus, the Lee's the Massie's...those guys are incredibly loyal to constituency and ideology. Point being, I bet they don't.
Do you mean Rand Paul?  I don't believe in his isolationist policies, because they would cripple our economy, but from a healthcare standpoint, he at least believes in a public option.  He doesn't call it that, because he's disingenuous, but it is what it is.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 24, 2017, 02:17:53 PM
I think that's true, but historically anyone who tried to reform healthcare has gotten absolutely crushed for it. Obamacare is failing majorly, and being associated with it hurts the left. And unfortunately for the Republicans they can't just repeal it and do nothing, which is their preference
The ACA is having some trouble in a handful of states, but every independent think tank says its sustainable.

It needs some tweaks.  Lose the mandate and provide a public option would be a good start.

Ryans plan would ensure that red state republicans get voted out of office in 2018.  I have never seen this many old white men say no to a republican bill.  It really is fun the watch.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on March 24, 2017, 02:49:56 PM
The ORANGE LOSER lost BIGLY today

We are gonna do so much LOSING that you'll all say TOO MUCH LOSING for me
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 24, 2017, 02:53:05 PM
The ORANGE LOSER lost BIGLY today

We are gonna do so much LOSING that you'll all say TOO MUCH LOSING for me

Serious question....do you call people names to their faces with the same hyperbole that you use here?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 24, 2017, 02:53:39 PM
Serious question....do you call people names to their faces with the same hyperbole that you use here?

Serious question....Do you?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 24, 2017, 02:54:27 PM
Serious question....Do you?

I don't go out in public anymore.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 24, 2017, 02:56:18 PM
Well, that abortion of a bill is dead.

Next up, Trump will try for tax reform.  I wish I could even pretend anymore.  It will be a cash grab for the ultra rich.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 25, 2017, 06:44:23 AM
http://deadsp.in/716Ca0U

Turnabout is fair play.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 26, 2017, 07:55:08 PM
What. The. freak.

http://sfist.com/2017/03/26/latest_calexit_gambit_split_califor.php
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 27, 2017, 12:35:01 PM
http://theatln.tc/2mIiyJy

Good article.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 27, 2017, 05:27:46 PM
http://deadsp.in/716Ca0U

Turnabout is fair play.

 While I don't disagree that the GOP led Congress should've had a confirmation hearing, there is absolutely nothing that guarantees this right of confirmation. Which I think is lost in the whole debate. While the GOP probably figured that even a hearing opens up a shitstorm in terms of negative press, not having a hearing accomplished that anyway. So I never saw the upside. But this notion that somehow that seat belongs to Garland is a bunch of bullshit. Otherwise, tell Anthony Kennedy to get off his derriere and give back the last 30 years of judicial opinions to Robert Bork...and this is coming from someone who considers Kennedy to be an all-time great Supreme Court justice.

However, it's not turnabout because the Dems aren't utilizing a Congressional majority, rather they're pitching a fit just to pitch one. Sort of hilarious after all the talk of obstructionism I had to hear for eight years. What was it our former President said? Elections have consequences? Indeed. And had Garland actually been confirmed given his previous jurisprudence on issues like our second amendment, the GOP would've completely sold out its base. We're one judge away from a severe upheaval of the second amendment as we know it in this country.

Merrick Garland was never getting confirmed in a situation where there was a Republican majority, and I'm of the belief that he was nominated just to pick a fight. Had former President Obama been serious about picking a judicial moderate, Sri Srinivasan was sitting right there.

Given that they don't have said congressional majority, this filibuster serves absolutely no purpose. I'd say its damaging and that the GOP doesn't have recourse, but thanks to everyones favorite mongrel idiot Harry Reid, they do indeed have the nuclear option to override. Gorsuch isn't getting Bork'd because the numbers don't exist for them to do so. Nor should he. He's a solid enough nominee, despite certain facets of the media, the usual suspects trying to portray him as a fascist, or talk about his rulings like they have any idea as to what a justices role is supposed to be.

Love how now "Roe v. Wade is the law of the land" (I concur) isn't enough for the absolute frauds like Liz Warren to scream that someone is dangerously outside the mainstream. In a sea of excrement, she's a true island onto herself.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 27, 2017, 09:39:52 PM
meep!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 27, 2017, 10:58:26 PM
Love how now "Roe v. Wade is the law of the land" (I concur) isn't enough for the absolute frauds like Liz Warren to scream that someone is dangerously outside the mainstream. In a sea of excrement, she's a true island onto herself.

SBTC&T
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Matt4776 on March 28, 2017, 06:26:50 AM

Merrick Garland was never getting confirmed in a situation where there was a Republican majority, and I'm of the belief that he was nominated just to pick a fight. Had former President Obama been serious about picking a judicial moderate, Sri Srinivasan was sitting right there.


"The president told me several times he’s going to name a moderate [to fill the court vacancy], but I don’t believe him. [Obama] could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man. He probably won’t do that because this appointment is about the election. So I’m pretty sure he’ll name someone the [liberal Democratic base] wants.”

Conservative Republican Senator Orrin Hatch, one of the major proponents of the strategy to not even let Garland get a hearing, and three time chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Try again, please.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on March 28, 2017, 06:46:44 AM
I agree with Mitch the Moron from Kentucky

No SCOTUS nominee should be considered or confirmed in the final year of a Presidency

Since Trump is clearly in his final year before impeachment and removal or resignation and seeking asylum in Russia (probably less than 3 months) Gorsuch cannot be confirmed
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 28, 2017, 07:40:55 AM
"The president told me several times he’s going to name a moderate [to fill the court vacancy], but I don’t believe him. [Obama] could easily name Merrick Garland, who is a fine man. He probably won’t do that because this appointment is about the election. So I’m pretty sure he’ll name someone the [liberal Democratic base] wants.”

Conservative Republican Senator Orrin Hatch, one of the major proponents of the strategy to not even let Garland get a hearing, and three time chair of the Senate Judiciary Committee.

Try again, please.

AHAHAHA. Well if old delusional retard Orrin Hatch said it, it must be true. Did you also think Orrin Hatch had it correct when he pushed heavily for the impeachment of Bubba?  I love how these guys are old, crusty douchebags until we say something "we" like. It's the same with McCain.

I don't have to try anything again. A nomination is not grounds for automatic approval. At least Garland was objected to in a fashion where they didn't smear him with lies and innuendo like what that stupid drunk/vehicular homicide perpetrator Ted Kennedy did to Bork.

His decision and subsequent rhetoric on Heller was always going to disqualify him. Had he been confirmed the majority in Congress would've actually been in dereliction of their duty to the constituency that sent them to capital hill as that majority. They were absolutely sent to oppose the nomination of any justice that would seek to repeal the 2nd amendments applicability to individuals. 

If you can find in the Constitution where a right to be rubber stamped by the Senate after a Presidential nomination to the SCOTUS bench, then I'll retract my position. It doesn't exist. It never has. In the same way that the Dems are within their right to filibuster Gorsuch, the GOP was within their right to deny Garland the seat. The difference is, one party was successful because they were acting with a congressional majority, and the other party is pitching a fit for the sole purpose of having a mechanism that they introduced used against them for reasons I still don't understand. It's a fight they can't win.

I agree with Mitch the Moron from Kentucky

No SCOTUS nominee should be considered or confirmed in the final year of a Presidency

Since Trump is clearly in his final year before impeachment and removal or resignation and seeking asylum in Russia (probably less than 3 months) Gorsuch cannot be confirmed

There's something wrong with your brain.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Matt4776 on March 28, 2017, 09:20:21 AM
AHAHAHA. Well if old delusional retard Orrin Hatch said it, it must be true. Did you also think Orrin Hatch had it correct when he pushed heavily for the impeachment of Bubba?  I love how these guys are old, crusty douchebags until we say something "we" like. It's the same with McCain.

I don't have to try anything again. A nomination is not grounds for automatic approval. At least Garland was objected to in a fashion where they didn't smear him with lies and innuendo like what that stupid drunk/vehicular homicide perpetrator Ted Kennedy did to Bork.

His decision and subsequent rhetoric on Heller was always going to disqualify him. Had he been confirmed the majority in Congress would've actually been in dereliction of their duty to the constituency that sent them to capital hill as that majority. They were absolutely sent to oppose the nomination of any justice that would seek to repeal the 2nd amendments applicability to individuals. 

If you can find in the Constitution where a right to be rubber stamped by the Senate after a Presidential nomination to the SCOTUS bench, then I'll retract my position. It doesn't exist. It never has. In the same way that the Dems are within their right to filibuster Gorsuch, the GOP was within their right to deny Garland the seat. The difference is, one party was successful because they were acting with a congressional majority, and the other party is pitching a fit for the sole purpose of having a mechanism that they introduced used against them for reasons I still don't understand. It's a fight they can't win.

There's something wrong with your brain.

So many red herrings and so much revisionist history it's hard to keep track of it all.

1. Garland is rated as a moderate by literally almost every judicial tracking organization. His most "extreme" ratings rate him as a slight liberal-leaning centrist with a pro-prosecution (a conservative trait) twist.

2. He was confirmed for the DC Circuit by many GOP senators, including McCain and Hatch. The only GOP senators that voted no did so because they "didn't want a 11th judge on the court", and had no problems with his political views or qualifications.

3. The idea that something is constitutionally legal is not the argument here. The comical and blatant hypocrisy for cheap political points is hilarious though. And I sure hope that McConnell tries the nuclear option in 2018 (because he can't change the rules of congress until the next session I believe). I doubt he will though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 28, 2017, 10:18:56 AM
So many red herrings and so much revisionist history it's hard to keep track of it all.

1. Garland is rated as a moderate by literally almost every judicial tracking organization. His most "extreme" ratings rate him as a slight liberal-leaning centrist with a pro-prosecution (a conservative trait) twist.

2. He was confirmed for the DC Circuit by many GOP senators, including McCain and Hatch. The only GOP senators that voted no did so because they "didn't want a 11th judge on the court", and had no problems with his political views or qualifications.

3. The idea that something is constitutionally legal is not the argument here. The comical and blatant hypocrisy for cheap political points is hilarious though. And I sure hope that McConnell tries the nuclear option in 2018 (because he can't change the rules of congress until the next session I believe). I doubt he will though.

There is literally nothing about this that is revisionist history, and I find it especially hilarious that if the Dems actually knew how to win an election or two and had a Congressional majority, the rhetoric would be completely different. After all, the whole premise of denying SCOTUS hearings came from everyones favorite village idiot, Joe Biden.

1. Those same "tracking organizations" will tell you Richard Posner is a conservative. Politifact and Snopes also rate "truth in media," it doesn't mean they aren't completely compromised by bias as well. Besides being pro-prosecution isn't a "conservative trait." Scalia was an ardent defender of defendants rights, especially the indigent. Surprising I know. Luckily all of this stuff is easily accessible, as is Garlands jurisprudence on Heller, which puts to rest any notion that he's any sort of moderate on a very pertinent issue.

2. You can literally say the same thing about Gorsuch.

3. When you're talking about hypocrisy, are you referring to how the last 8 years were nothing but a bitchfest about republican obstructionism, when now all the left wants to do is obstruct? Again, what would be the purpose of a GOP congressional majority in the face of a Democratic President? Certainly not to provide a rubber stamp.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on March 28, 2017, 12:22:35 PM
Wow

What a totally dumb RW Trumpwad you are.

Hopefully your IQ is higher than his 37
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 28, 2017, 12:49:59 PM
Wow

What a totally dumb RW Trumpwad you are.

Hopefully your IQ is higher than his 37

(https://m.popkey.co/12530a/X03Rg.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 28, 2017, 01:16:12 PM
While I don't disagree that the GOP led Congress should've had a confirmation hearing, there is absolutely nothing that guarantees this right of confirmation. Which I think is lost in the whole debate. While the GOP probably figured that even a hearing opens up a shitstorm in terms of negative press, not having a hearing accomplished that anyway. So I never saw the upside. But this notion that somehow that seat belongs to Garland is a bunch of bullshit. Otherwise, tell Anthony Kennedy to get off his derriere and give back the last 30 years of judicial opinions to Robert Bork...and this is coming from someone who considers Kennedy to be an all-time great Supreme Court justice.

However, it's not turnabout because the Dems aren't utilizing a Congressional majority, rather they're pitching a fit just to pitch one. Sort of hilarious after all the talk of obstructionism I had to hear for eight years. What was it our former President said? Elections have consequences? Indeed. And had Garland actually been confirmed given his previous jurisprudence on issues like our second amendment, the GOP would've completely sold out its base. We're one judge away from a severe upheaval of the second amendment as we know it in this country.

Merrick Garland was never getting confirmed in a situation where there was a Republican majority, and I'm of the belief that he was nominated just to pick a fight. Had former President Obama been serious about picking a judicial moderate, Sri Srinivasan was sitting right there.

Given that they don't have said congressional majority, this filibuster serves absolutely no purpose. I'd say its damaging and that the GOP doesn't have recourse, but thanks to everyones favorite mongrel idiot Harry Reid, they do indeed have the nuclear option to override. Gorsuch isn't getting Bork'd because the numbers don't exist for them to do so. Nor should he. He's a solid enough nominee, despite certain facets of the media, the usual suspects trying to portray him as a fascist, or talk about his rulings like they have any idea as to what a justices role is supposed to be.

Love how now "Roe v. Wade is the law of the land" (I concur) isn't enough for the absolute frauds like Liz Warren to scream that someone is dangerously outside the mainstream. In a sea of excrement, she's a true island onto herself.
This is a big block of excrement.  Bork at least got a hearing.  I have mixed opinions about how it went down, but it does not relate in any way.

Obama nominated a moderate republican FFS.  The SCOTUS needs swing votes.  It is best for everyone.  There should have been a hearing and a vote.

By any interpretation of the constitution this seat is stolen.

Garland should have a hearing now.  Ultra right wing version of Anthony Bourdain looking guy got next.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 28, 2017, 01:20:35 PM
And you want to talk about obstruction?  Just don't.  The Dems let all these idiots in so far.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 28, 2017, 04:22:18 PM
This is a big block of excrement.  Bork at least got a hearing.  I have mixed opinions about how it went down, but it does not relate in any way.

Obama nominated a moderate republican FFS.  The SCOTUS needs swing votes.  It is best for everyone.  There should have been a hearing and a vote.

By any interpretation of the constitution this seat is stolen.

Garland should have a hearing now.  Ultra right wing version of Anthony Bourdain looking guy got next.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Garland isn't a moderate republican because you say he is. And the fact that you think Garland is a moderate republican shows how left you are. Let me guess, Hillary is a republican right? Christ.

"By any interpretation of the constitution this seat is stolen"

Who's interpretation is that? Salons? Slates? This quote is stupid as freak. THERE IS NO CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEE THAT A PRESIDENT GETS A RUBBER STAMP ON JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS. There isn't one for trump either. It just so happens the party he 'belongs to" (debatable) holds a congressional majority. Again, elections have consequences!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 28, 2017, 05:49:52 PM
Garland isn't a moderate republican because you say he is. And the fact that you think Garland is a moderate republican shows how left you are. Let me guess, Hillary is a republican right? Christ.

"By any interpretation of the constitution this seat is stolen"

Who's interpretation is that? Salons? Slates? This quote is stupid as freak. THERE IS NO CONSTITUTIONAL GUARANTEE THAT A PRESIDENT GETS A RUBBER STAMP ON JUDICIAL NOMINATIONS. There isn't one for trump either. It just so happens the party he 'belongs to" (debatable) holds a congressional majority. Again, elections have consequences!
For some reason you think I read excrement liberal blogs.  I might catch Huffington when someone reposts on facebook, but thats it.  I actually do some legwork on my opinions.

By any reasonable cohesive cognition, Garland and the Clintons would have been considered moderate republicans in 1990 compared to what we have now.

Your party has gone so far to the right it is unrecognizable.  You are fighting an unwinnable war.  Instead of moving towards the inevitable conclusion at a measured pace, recent nonsense is going to slingshot us there.

We are a progressive country.  We are just waiting for old white people to die at this point.  Your policies, if you actually had any you could pass, are excrement.

Republicans used to be the friends you put up with.  They slowed you down a bit, but it was cool to take a moment and maybe look at the clouds.

Now that you are starting to die off you have decided to freak this country to death with your vengeful, selfish agenda.

Before you inevitably tell me to eat excrement, tell me the one good thing the republicans did for this country in the last 30 years, and why it was good.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 28, 2017, 08:19:57 PM
For some reason you think I read excrement liberal blogs.  I might catch Huffington when someone reposts on facebook, but thats it.  I actually do some legwork on my opinions.

By any reasonable cohesive cognition, Garland and the Clintons would have been considered moderate republicans in 1990 compared to what we have now.

Your party has gone so far to the right it is unrecognizable.  You are fighting an unwinnable war.  Instead of moving towards the inevitable conclusion at a measured pace, recent nonsense is going to slingshot us there.

We are a progressive country.  We are just waiting for old white people to die at this point.  Your policies, if you actually had any you could pass, are excrement.

Republicans used to be the friends you put up with.  They slowed you down a bit, but it was cool to take a moment and maybe look at the clouds.

Now that you are starting to die off you have decided to freak this country to death with your vengeful, selfish agenda.

Before you inevitably tell me to eat excrement, tell me the one good thing the republicans did for this country in the last 30 years, and why it was good.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

I mean really. You're a bad cliche of a liberal at this point. The terrible attempt to deflect at your own stupidity that somehow in the Constitution its enumerated that Merrick Garland is owed a senate seat. The delusion that "the war is unwinnable." (Republicans of course occupy the majority of the House, the Senate, state and local governments, governorships, and the Presidency. HAHAHA WHAT A freaking JOKE. And by the way, I really don't identify myself as a die in the wool republican, socially definitely more a classical liberal but I'd stand with them over a regressive such as yourself.) The smug condescension that you somehow know best, that the opposition is hateful and bigoted, the hope that "old white people will die off." You are the derriere end of the comments section of DailyKos come to life. It's pathetic.

Again. Garland and the Clintons aren't conservatives because you're a regressive leftist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 28, 2017, 08:23:30 PM
For some reason you think I read excrement liberal blogs.  I might catch Huffington when someone reposts on facebook, but thats it.  I actually do some legwork on my opinions.

By any reasonable cohesive cognition, Garland and the Clintons would have been considered moderate republicans in 1990 compared to what we have now.

Your party has gone so far to the right it is unrecognizable.  You are fighting an unwinnable war.  Instead of moving towards the inevitable conclusion at a measured pace, recent nonsense is going to slingshot us there.

We are a progressive country.  We are just waiting for old white people to die at this point.  Your policies, if you actually had any you could pass, are excrement.

Republicans used to be the friends you put up with.  They slowed you down a bit, but it was cool to take a moment and maybe look at the clouds.

Now that you are starting to die off you have decided to freak this country to death with your vengeful, selfish agenda.

Before you inevitably tell me to eat excrement, tell me the one good thing the republicans did for this country in the last 30 years, and why it was good.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


In the grand scheme of the world isn't the United States a conservative  country? Especially compared to Europe and other countries? Yes the Republicans are a absolute excrement party completely out of touch with reality and the desires of the American people for the most part. There's some stuff they hold traction on (ie taxes and supposedly spending), but for the most part they need a complete overhaul. That said the untied states is far more conservative than much of the world still

Also you're seriously delusional about your views on conservative liberal and moderate
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 28, 2017, 08:40:09 PM
I have no issue conceding that Garland would be more "moderate/conservative" than some of the liberal judges currently on the supreme court. But the assertion that he falls to the right of the spectrum is completely absurd. Obama was a quite liberal president, so him nominating a conservative would literally make zero sense
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 28, 2017, 08:43:54 PM
I mean really. You're a bad cliche of a liberal at this point. The terrible attempt to deflect at your own stupidity that somehow in the Constitution its enumerated that Merrick Garland is owed a senate seat. The delusion that "the war is unwinnable." (Republicans of course occupy the majority of the House, the Senate, state and local governments, governorships, and the Presidency. HAHAHA WHAT A freaking JOKE. And by the way, I really don't identify myself as a die in the wool republican, socially definitely more a classical liberal but I'd stand with them over a regressive such as yourself.) The smug condescension that you somehow know best, that the opposition is hateful and bigoted, the hope that "old white people will die off." You are the derriere end of the comments section of DailyKos come to life. It's pathetic.

Again. Garland and the Clintons aren't conservatives because you're a regressive leftist.
Another big block of excrement.  You talk about deflection, and you didn't even try to answer the question I asked you.

This is why republicans cannot govern.  You are only meant to be speed bumps.

Oh, and regressive leftist.  What does that even mean?  LMFAO

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 28, 2017, 08:50:16 PM
In the grand scheme of the world isn't the United States a conservative  country? Especially compared to Europe and other countries? Yes the Republicans are a absolute shirt party completely out of touch with reality and the desires of the American people for the most part. There's some stuff they hold traction on (ie taxes and supposedly spending), but for the most part they need a complete overhaul. That said the untied states is far more conservative than much of the world still

Also you're seriously delusional about your views on conservative liberal and moderate
I've said it before, but I am happy to respond.

We need conservatives.

They keep us from moving too fast.  I'm totally OK with that.  The problem is that the functional voice of the conservatives has been lost in the current republican party.

The current republican party uses deficit spending like a credit card that they never intend to pay back.  How is that conservative?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 28, 2017, 08:54:58 PM
I have no issue conceding that Garland would be more "moderate/conservative" than some of the liberal judges currently on the supreme court. But the assertion that he falls to the right of the spectrum is completely absurd. Obama was a quite liberal president, so him nominating a conservative would literally make zero sense
Do a tad of research on his rulings.  He would be a swing vote, not unlike Kennedy.  Kennedy fucked up on Citizens United, but you take the good with the bad.  Obama picked him because he knew he would get 60 or more votes.  Turtle just refused to let it happen.

What the freak happened to compromise?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 28, 2017, 09:01:59 PM
I've said it before, but I am happy to respond.

We need conservatives.

They keep us from moving too fast.  I'm totally OK with that.  The problem is that the functional voice of the conservatives has been lost in the current republican party.

The current republican party uses deficit spending like a credit card that they never intend to pay back.  How is that conservative?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Republican =/= conservative

The Republicans are freaking terrible, and the leadership of the Republican party needs to disappear allowing younger more moderate people who believe in science and arent taught ignorant religious views like many in the current republican party (lets face it Republicans social views are for the most part shitty and out of touch with reality.

But the left is a joke too. They just lost an election against a clown that the Republicans handed to them, because they were completely rampant with corruption and ALSO out of touch with the American people.

The fact is if the left stopped blaming rich people, white people, and men for all the problems in the world, and if the right stopped pretending that the Bible is both literal and real, then this world would be a much better place. But instead you have two parties absolutely covered in ignorance pitting the American people against each other.

Look I agree with you 100% the Republicans are freaking terrible, because its the truth. But so are the Democrats. A group of reasonable intelligent people capable of thinking for themselves without party allegiances would solve so many more problems and run this country so much better.

But party diehards and zealots on both sides of the aisle (which 100% includes you) are the freaking problem. Maybe if were lucky in our lifetimes this broken two party system could fix itself.

I do think that as older bible thumping Republicans die off and their social views get substantially reduced in society, then maybe the fluidity of party allegiances could be altered significantly as well when social views becomes a much smaller issue.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 28, 2017, 09:07:27 PM
Do a tad of research on his rulings.  He would be a swing vote, not unlike Kennedy.  Kennedy fucked up on Citizens United, but you take the good with the bad.  Obama picked him because he knew he would get 60 or more votes.  Turtle just refused to let it happen.

What the freak happened to compromise?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/16/us/politics/garland-supreme-court-nomination.html

According to the NYT
Quote
Measures of ideology by four political scientists show where the justices stand in relation to one another. Judge Garland’s score is based on the score of his appointing president, Bill Clinton. This methodology is considered to be a “reasonably good predictor of voting on the Supreme Court,” says Prof. Lee Epstein of Washington University.

(it lists him as quite liberal)

Im sure theres websites that can make an argument for him being "moderate" as well, its very freaking clear neither of us are qualified to make a judgement on the accuracy of these. Regardless theres no reasonable website out there arguing that hes "conservative" because thats freaking stupid
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 28, 2017, 09:07:41 PM
Republican =/= conservative

The Republicans are freaking terrible, and the leadership of the Republican party needs to disappear allowing younger more moderate people who believe in science and arent taught ignorant religious views like many in the current republican party (lets face it Republicans social views are for the most part shitty and out of touch with reality.

But the left is a joke too. They just lost an election against a clown that the Republicans handed to them, because they were completely rampant with corruption and ALSO out of touch with the American people.

The fact is if the left stopped blaming rich people, white people, and men for all the problems in the world, and if the right stopped pretending that the Bible is both literal and real, then this world would be a much better place. But instead you have two parties absolutely covered in ignorance pitting the American people against each other.

Look I agree with you 100% the Republicans are freaking terrible, because its the truth. But so are the Democrats. A group of reasonable intelligent people capable of thinking for themselves without party allegiances would solve so many more problems and run this country so much better.

But party diehards and zealots on both sides of the aisle (which 100% includes you) are the freaking problem. Maybe if were lucky in our lifetimes this broken two party system could fix itself.

I do think that as older bible thumping Republicans die off and their social views get substantially reduced in society, then maybe the fluidity of party allegiances could be altered significantly as well when social views becomes a much smaller issue.
This is quite possibly the best post you have ever made.  I have renewed faith in the world.

I'm only a democrat because I feel they are the slightly lesser of two evils.  I totally agree that if we take each issue and intelligently talk about it, we can fix everything.

Just need to get money and greed out of it.

Just noticed the gut punch.  I am not a zealot to any party.  If loving the world, the country, and thinking that all humanity deserves a chance makes me an poopchute, I will take it.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 28, 2017, 09:12:36 PM
This is quite possibly the best post you have ever made.  I have renewed faith in the world.

I'm only a democrat because I feel they are the slightly lesser of two evils.  I totally agree that if we take each issue and intelligently talk about it, we can fix everything.

Just need to get money and greed out of it.

Just noticed the gut punch.  I am not a zealot to any party.  If loving the world, the country, and thinking that all humanity deserves a chance makes me an poopchute, I will take it.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


Youve made it abundantly clear that you think the Republicans are the problem.  Both partys are the problem. When people can understand that, they can begun to fix it .
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 28, 2017, 09:14:24 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/03/16/us/politics/garland-supreme-court-nomination.html

According to the NYT
(it lists him as quite liberal)

Im sure theres websites that can make an argument for him being "moderate" as well, its very freaking clear neither of us are qualified to make a judgement on the accuracy of these. Regardless theres no reasonable website out there arguing that hes "conservative" because thats freaking stupid
He was the most moderate option on the table.  Raegan himself would be a moderate, leaning a little bit left by todays standards.

Financially he was a disaster, but socially he wasn't the worst.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 28, 2017, 09:22:05 PM
Youve made it abundantly clear that you think the Republicans are the problem.  Both partys are the problem. When people can understand that, they can begun to fix it .
Well, republicans are making themselves the problem.  The black muslim in chief really screwed them up.  I have never seen anything like it, and I have a few years on you.

On just about every issue, republicans are preaching to the minority of Americans.  They could have at least put Obama's infrastructure and immigration bills to a vote.  They refused.  They wanted the black muslim to fail.

I never had a problem with republicans in general until the last 8 years.  I was not a fan of Bush because lying and wars and thousands of dead americans, but it was never because he was republican.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 28, 2017, 09:25:26 PM
Well, republicans are making themselves the problem.  The black muslim in chief really screwed them up.  I have never seen anything like it, and I have a few years on you.

On just about every issue, republicans are preaching to the minority of Americans.  They could have at least put Obama's infrastructure and immigration bills to a vote.  They refused.  They wanted the black muslim to fail.

I never had a problem with republicans in general until the last 8 years.  I was not a fan of Bush because lying and wars and thousands of dead americans, but it was never because he was republican.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


Did the left not want Bush to fail for 8 years and compare him to Hitler  constantly ?

Both partys are the problem, any other opinion is unreasonable
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 28, 2017, 09:33:13 PM
Did the left not want Bush to fail for 8 years and compare him to Hitler  constantly ?

Both partys are the problem, any other opinion is unreasonable
No.  I never wanted him to fail.  I didn't  like him as president, but he was the president.

And congress actually attempted to function under him.  There were actual bipartisan votes and stuff.

Enter a relatively moderate liberal with black skin, introducing two of the biggest bipartisan bills in history...  No vote.



Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 28, 2017, 09:52:21 PM
No.  I never wanted him to fail.  I didn't  like him as president, but he was the president.

And congress actually attempted to function under him.  There were actual bipartisan votes and stuff.

Enter a relatively moderate liberal with black skin, introducing two of the biggest bipartisan bills in history...  No vote.



Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Which bipartisan bills are those ?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 28, 2017, 11:23:05 PM
Which bipartisan bills are those ?
Scroll up.  His infrastructure and immigration bills would have passed based on independant polling, but they were never allowed to the floor of the house.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 28, 2017, 11:32:51 PM
Oh, and regressive leftist.  What does that even mean?  LMFAO

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

It's a pejorative version of progressive. IMO it's best reserved for those who fetishize Islam.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 28, 2017, 11:34:27 PM
Before you inevitably tell me to eat excrement, tell me the one good thing the republicans did for this country in the last 30 years, and why it was good.

Medicare expansion under Dubya.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 28, 2017, 11:40:05 PM
The Republicans are freaking terrible, and the leadership of the Republican party needs to disappear allowing younger more moderate people who believe in science and arent taught ignorant religious views like many in the current republican party (lets face it Republicans social views are for the most part shitty and out of touch with reality.

But the left is a joke too. They just lost an election against a clown that the Republicans handed to them, because they were completely rampant with corruption and ALSO out of touch with the American people.

The fact is if the left stopped blaming rich people, white people, and men for all the problems in the world, and if the right stopped pretending that the Bible is both literal and real, then this world would be a much better place. But instead you have two parties absolutely covered in ignorance pitting the American people against each other.

Look I agree with you 100% the Republicans are freaking terrible, because its the truth. But so are the Democrats. A group of reasonable intelligent people capable of thinking for themselves without party allegiances would solve so many more problems and run this country so much better.

But party diehards and zealots on both sides of the aisle (which 100% includes you) are the freaking problem. Maybe if were lucky in our lifetimes this broken two party system could fix itself.

It's amazing how all these pieces of excrement manage to stay in office. It's almost like rich people are propping them up to protect their own interests. But that's impossible, because they are blameless.

Those poor persecuted billionaires.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 29, 2017, 12:24:03 AM
Medicare expansion under Dubya.
Damnit Badge I was trying to bait him.

W did a couple things that were downright Kenyan.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 29, 2017, 12:25:01 AM
It's amazing how all these pieces of excrement manage to stay in office. It's almost like rich people are propping them up to protect their own interests. But that's impossible, because they are blameless.

Those poor persecuted billionaires.
Careful buddy, I identify as trans-billionaire.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 29, 2017, 05:42:52 AM
Do a tad of research on his rulings.  He would be a swing vote, not unlike Kennedy.  Kennedy fucked up on Citizens United, but you take the good with the bad.  Obama picked him because he knew he would get 60 or more votes.  Turtle just refused to let it happen.

What the freak happened to compromise?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Comparing Merrick Garland to the very definition of a centrist in Anthony Kennedy. Jesus Christ. I guess I shouldn't be surprised considering the comparison is coming from someone that thinks Obama was "relatively moderate." Your assertion that Obama couldn't have found a more "moderate judge" is also false, and shows your lack of knowledge on this subject (and everything else for that matter). Again. Sri Srinivasan was sitting right there.

As far as what happened to compromise, i don't know, maybe you should ask the senate majority leader who tabled nearly 400 pieces of legislation. And you want to talk about compromise?! Again, freak your blatant one-sided hypocrisy. But you aren't a zealot of any party though, even though again your rhetoric might as well come straight out of the derriere end of DailyKos.

Quote
Just noticed the gut punch.  I am not a zealot to any party.  If loving the world, the country, and thinking that all humanity deserves a chance makes me an poopchute, I will take it.

All of humanity except white people that should die off of course. More of that modern liberal smugness. You guys ugh, you're such MARTYRS FOR THE WORLD! WHAT WOULD WE DO WITHOUT YOU!! THE RESISTANCE YAAAAASSSSS!!! freaking idiots.

Damnit Badge I was trying to bait him.

W did a couple things that were downright Kenyan.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

PEPFAR is a humanitarian achievement that the Obama administration can only dream about matching, but that didn't stop people such as yourself from calling him Hitler, disrespecting him at every turn in the office and then demanding that people respect the position because your boy walked in as his successor. Not the biggest fan of W, but it was always fun getting lectured about respecting the Presidency from people that were singing "SIEG HEIL TO THE PRESIDENT GASSMAN!"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on March 29, 2017, 06:02:47 AM
All of humanity except white people that should die off of course. More of that modern liberal smugness.

What is your actual evidence that any individual here believes anything similar to this? Also still waiting on that evidence of Obama missing Scalia's funeral because he was golfing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 29, 2017, 06:36:07 AM
What is your actual evidence that any individual here believes anything similar to this? Also still waiting on that evidence of Obama missing Scalia's funeral because he was golfing.


We are just waiting for old white people to die at this point.  Your policies, if you actually had any you could pass, are excrement.

Now that you are starting to die off you have decided to freak this country to death with your vengeful, selfish agenda.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Of course despite the quote being what it is, if this was held up under the scrutiny of Snopes or Politifact my comment would be judged as mostly false.

Anyway ONS, you were saying? Oh. Still trying to deflect from the horrible optics that is a President skipping out on the funeral of a sitting supreme court justice. Admittedly I don't know if he was playing golf. You also don't know that he wasn't. At least he wasn't dancing on the mans grave like so many others on the left.

If say for example, RBG unfortunately passes away while still a sitting member of the Court, and Trump skips the funeral he's 100 percent in the wrong, even if the last guy just set a precedent with his own actions. This is a very cut and dry issue.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 29, 2017, 09:26:09 AM
W did some a couple good things.  Those things received more democrat votes than republican.

The votes were there for infrastructure and immigration under Obama.  No debate or vote.

Yes, as old white men die off, so will voter supression, and the other obstructions to progress.

The AHCA, otherwise known as the millionaire welfare act, was so bad it couldn't get the votes in a house with the largest majority in 90 years.

Unless republicans remember what moderate conservatism is, they are doomed to such collosal failures.  Graham and McCain, to their credit, at least seem to get it.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on March 29, 2017, 10:07:22 AM
Admittedly I don't know if he was playing golf.

And what kind of news sources are you reading/watching to affirmatively state that he was playing golf? Why do you keep accusing me of deflection when you don't answer my question?

And yes, I'm sure Fenwyr, as a white man (I assume), was writing that he unequivocally wants all white people to die. No purposeful misinterpretation of his post there.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 29, 2017, 11:25:17 AM
It's being misrepresented in the media as some new thing that Congress just signed away the rights to our privacy, but it's still a truckload of excrement.

While ISPs have always been able to sell our data, the Obama administration introduced rules that should be kicking in to now protect our data. Instead, a bunch of assholes whose pockets were lined with hundreds of thousands of telco lobbyist dollars voted away the regulations.

But that's good for the citizens of the United States, right? Deregulation is good for everyone, right?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 29, 2017, 12:06:33 PM
And what kind of news sources are you reading/watching to affirmatively state that he was playing golf? Why do you keep accusing me of deflection when you don't answer my question?

And yes, I'm sure Fenwyr, as a white man (I assume), was writing that he unequivocally wants all white people to die. No purposeful misinterpretation of his post there.

How can I deflect from a question you didn't even ask yet? You asked about sourcing in your first question? You have no idea what he was doing.

Misinterpretation? It's right there. Repeatedly. In black and white.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 29, 2017, 12:23:45 PM
It's being misrepresented in the media as some new thing that Congress just signed away the rights to our privacy, but it's still a truckload of excrement.

While ISPs have always been able to sell our data, the Obama administration introduced rules that should be kicking in to now protect our data. Instead, a bunch of assholes whose pockets were lined with hundreds of thousands of telco lobbyist dollars voted away the regulations.

But that's good for the citizens of the United States, right? Deregulation is good for everyone, right?
Glenn Greenwald smackdown:

https://theintercept.com/2017/03/29/to-serve-att-and-comcast-congressional-gop-votes-to-destroy-online-privacy/

"But what distinguishes this latest vote is that this pretext is unavailable. Nobody can claim with a straight face that allowing AT&T and Comcast to sell their users’ browser histories has any relationship to national security. Indeed, there’s no minimally persuasive rationale that can be concocted for this vote. It manifestly has only one purpose: maximizing the commercial interests of these telecom giants at the expense of ordinary citizens. It’s so blatant here that it cannot even be disguised."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 29, 2017, 12:50:34 PM
Reminder to you all: if you're not already using a VPN, you should be. A VPN will protect much (although not all) of the nature of your internet activity from your ISP.

You can get an excellent quality VPN for $3-4 a month that will cover all of your household devices. There is no good reason not to do it, and this latest ruling just provided another reason why you should.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 29, 2017, 10:48:58 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/capital-weather-gang/wp/2017/03/29/a-political-organization-that-doubts-climate-science-is-sending-this-book-to-200000-teachers/

"Accompanying the materials is a cover letter from Lennie Jarratt, project manager of Heartland’s Center for Transforming Education. He asks teachers to “consider the possibility” that the science is not settled. “If that’s the case, then students would be better served by letting them know a vibrant debate is taking place among scientists,” he writes. The letter also points teachers to an online guide to using the DVD in their classrooms.

The Heartland initiative dismisses multiple studies showing scientists are in near unanimous agreement that humans are changing the climate. Even if human activity is contributing to climate change, the book argues, it “would probably not be harmful, because many areas of the world would benefit from or adjust to climate change.”"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 30, 2017, 01:16:32 AM
Fortunately Badge, there are like 10 hurdles for this thing.  Thou shall not pass.

For what the other guys have been chatting about, it will likely get derriere raped in the courts as well.

There are plenty of extremely intelligent AGs out there chomping at the bit to kill Its executive orders.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 30, 2017, 09:35:53 AM
Glenn Greenwald smackdown:

https://theintercept.com/2017/03/29/to-serve-att-and-comcast-congressional-gop-votes-to-destroy-online-privacy/

"But what distinguishes this latest vote is that this pretext is unavailable. Nobody can claim with a straight face that allowing AT&T and Comcast to sell their users’ browser histories has any relationship to national security. Indeed, there’s no minimally persuasive rationale that can be concocted for this vote. It manifestly has only one purpose: maximizing the commercial interests of these telecom giants at the expense of ordinary citizens. It’s so blatant here that it cannot even be disguised."

Almost as good as the beating he gave to Louise Mensch on twitter earlier this week.  Took me a little while to take Greenwald seriously again after he was...obtuse at best and flat out dishonest at worst when it came to Sam Harris having to defend himself from that fat moron Cenk, but Glenn's coverage of election 2016 and the fallout has been fair and even handed imho.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on March 30, 2017, 10:05:24 AM
You asked about sourcing in your first question?

Yeah, that's exactly what I meant when I wrote, "Also still waiting on that evidence of Obama missing Scalia's funeral because he was golfing. (http://www.jetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,135.msg256038.html#msg256038)"

Also what I meant when I wrote, "I wonder what credible news sources you follow. (http://www.jetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,3374.msg246446.html#msg246446)"

Also what I meant when I wrote, " Oh I'm sorry, you're obviously correct that Obama was golfing during Scalia's funeral after this preponderance of evidence. (http://www.jetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,3374.msg246581.html#msg246581)"

For someone who has an incredibly discerning eye when it comes to the bias of mass media news outlets, you provide very few of your own sources - and I am genuinely curious how and where you gather your facts that lead you to these types of conclusions (http://www.jetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,3374.msg246443.html#msg246443).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 30, 2017, 10:15:31 AM
Yeah, that's exactly what I meant when I wrote, "Also still waiting on that evidence of Obama missing Scalia's funeral because he was golfing. (http://www.jetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,135.msg256038.html#msg256038)"

Also what I meant when I wrote, "I wonder what credible news sources you follow. (http://www.jetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,3374.msg246446.html#msg246446)"

Also what I meant when I wrote, " Oh I'm sorry, you're obviously correct that Obama was golfing during Scalia's funeral after this preponderance of evidence. (http://www.jetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,3374.msg246581.html#msg246581)"

For someone who has an incredibly discerning eye when it comes to the bias of mass media news outlets, you provide very few of your own sources - and I am genuinely curious how and where you gather your facts that lead you to these types of conclusions (http://www.jetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,3374.msg246443.html#msg246443).

Yeah, that's exactly what I meant when I wrote, "Also still waiting on that evidence of Obama missing Scalia's funeral because he was golfing. (http://www.jetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,135.msg256038.html#msg256038)"

Also what I meant when I wrote, "I wonder what credible news sources you follow. (http://www.jetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,3374.msg246446.html#msg246446)"

Also what I meant when I wrote, " Oh I'm sorry, you're obviously correct that Obama was golfing during Scalia's funeral after this preponderance of evidence. (http://www.jetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,3374.msg246581.html#msg246581)"

For someone who has an incredibly discerning eye when it comes to the bias of mass media news outlets, you provide very few of your own sources - and I am genuinely curious how and where you gather your facts that lead you to these types of conclusions (http://www.jetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,3374.msg246443.html#msg246443).

You're so important to me that I remember posts you made from January.

Amazing you're still hanging onto this when I've repeatedly said that him golfing during the funeral may have been hyperbole. Though again, given the statement made by Josh Earnst (who of course has ALWAYS been obvious and never intentionally deceitful to the media), you don't know he wasn't. Again, your refusal to even acknowledge the horrible optics of a President skipping out on the funeral of a sitting SCOTUS justice and your insistence on focusing on this is telling.

By the way, that second "conclusion" isn't hard to reach considering it's pure unadulterated fact. Or did he not take that eulogy as a way to remind us all that it's easier in this country to obtain a glock them a book?  (see! the former President uses hyperbole too!)

And yes, it's still hilarious that you're going to openly wonder about what type of news I'm consuming while you link the absolute garbage that is Snopes. Snopes is to objective journalism what Tony Pauline is to scouting the draft.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on March 30, 2017, 10:34:46 AM
Amazing you're still hanging onto this when I've repeatedly said that him golfing during the funeral may have been hyperbole.
It was notable to me because I had not ever heard the golf story before - I was and remain genuinely curious what type of media outlets report stories like that. And likewise, remain genuinely curious about what media outlets you read.

Quote
By the way, that second "conclusion" isn't hard to reach considering it's pure unadulterated fact. Or did he not take that eulogy as a way to remind us all that it's easier in this country to obtain a glock them a book?

Again, I honestly didn't remember which specific speech you're referring to - I neither idolize nor demonize Obama enough to particularly make note of any of his speeches, they're mostly pretty bland window-dressing for trying to get people to work together and be empathetic. It seems like you're referring to this speech. (https://obamawhitehouse.archives.gov/the-press-office/2016/07/12/remarks-president-memorial-service-fallen-dallas-police-officers)

Claiming that he specifically lectured white people about race relations dramatically oversimplifies that particular eulogy. In the same paragraph as the 'glock' comment, he said "so much of the tensions between police departments and minority communities that they serve is because we ask the police to do too much and we ask too little of ourselves."

and later on:

"Because with an open heart... maybe the teenager will see in the police officer the same words and values and authority of his parents."

and "we cannot match the sacrifices made by Officers Zamarripa and Ahrens, Krol, Smith, and Thompson, but surely we can try to match their sense of service.  We cannot match their courage, but we can strive to match their devotion."

Like many of his speeches, it's a fairly standard call for attempting to create a sense of community and shared empathy.

Quote
And yes, it's still hilarious that you're going to openly wonder about what type of news I'm consuming while you link the absolute garbage that is Snopes. Snopes is to objective journalism what Tony Pauline is to scouting the draft.

I don't particularly make a habit of reading Snopes, but it was an easy jumping off point to introduce myself to the golf-Scalia's funeral story - and no particularly controversial fact gathering in that particular summary as far as I could tell.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 30, 2017, 10:42:24 AM
You're so important to me that I remember posts you made from January.

Amazing you're still hanging onto this when I've repeatedly said that him golfing during the funeral may have been hyperbole. Though again, given the statement made by Josh Earnst (who of course has ALWAYS been obvious and never intentionally deceitful to the media), you don't know he wasn't. Again, your refusal to even acknowledge the horrible optics of a President skipping out on the funeral of a sitting SCOTUS justice and your insistence on focusing on this is telling.

By the way, that second "conclusion" isn't hard to reach considering it's pure unadulterated fact. Or did he not take that eulogy as a way to remind us all that it's easier in this country to obtain a glock them a book?  (see! the former President uses hyperbole too!)

And yes, it's still hilarious that you're going to openly wonder about what type of news I'm consuming while you link the absolute garbage that is Snopes. Snopes is to objective journalism what Tony Pauline is to scouting the draft.
The only thing worse than willful ignorance, is writing huge blocks of excrement to support said ignorance.

On a side note, Paul Ryan needs to be fucked in the face by the strap on from the movie Seven.  Every word out of his mouth is a certifiable lie.

I just cannot wrap my head around voting for people who's entire agenda is tax cuts for the rich.

This republican party would take there own mother off life support for a buck.



Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 30, 2017, 10:57:25 AM
The only thing worse than willful ignorance, is writing huge blocks of excrement to support said ignorance.

On a side note, Paul Ryan needs to be fucked in the face by the strap on from the movie Seven.  Every word out of his mouth is a certifiable lie.

I just cannot wrap my head around voting for people who's entire agenda is tax cuts for the rich.

This republican party would take there own mother off life support for a buck.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Aha. Ahaha. Ahahahahaha. That's freaking rich.

When you say ignorance, are you specifically referring to your belief that somehow the Supreme court seat that Gorsuch is about to take was stolen?

Or the belief that we just need all the old white men to die out in this country, like Trump didn't get more minority voters then Romney, or that white women were also in the majority in terms of supporting him instead of Hills. 

Seriously, you're a hack. I at least try to read and listen to "liberal" outlets such as Intercept, Atlantic, Sam Harris etc. I'll repeat it as long as it bares repeating. When it comes to politics you are the derriere-end of every Buzzfeed/Dailykos comments section in existence.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 30, 2017, 11:06:06 AM
Aha. Ahaha. Ahahahahaha. That's freaking rich.

When you say ignorance, are you specifically referring to your belief that somehow the Supreme court seat that Gorsuch is about to take was stolen?

Or the belief that we just need all the old white men to die out in this country, like Trump didn't get more minority voters then Romney, or that white women were also in the majority in terms of supporting him instead of Hills. 

Seriously, you're a hack. I at least try to read and listen to "liberal" outlets such as Intercept, Atlantic, Sam Harris etc. I'll repeat it as long as it bares repeating. When it comes to politics you are the derriere-end of every Buzzfeed/Dailykos comments section in existence.
Other than the fact I have never heard of most those of those sites.  Umm, OK.  I do not require someone else to form my opinions.

You, however, come off as someone who listens to right wing radio in your car rather than music like the rest of us.  You might not, but where your hate comes from otherwise, I have no idea.

What's your plan sport?  If you were president with a willing congress hanging on your every word, what would be your top 5 moves.

Hell, I'll take 1, since you have never answered a direct question in this thread yet.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 30, 2017, 03:24:52 PM
Republicans hate womens health.  Nice victory today.  You all must be proud.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 30, 2017, 03:33:26 PM
Republicans hate womens health.  Nice victory today.  You all must be proud.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


Did I miss something?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 30, 2017, 03:57:04 PM
Other than the fact I have never heard of most those of those sites.  Umm, OK.  I do not require someone else to form my opinions.

You, however, come off as someone who listens to right wing radio in your car rather than music like the rest of us.  You might not, but where your hate comes from otherwise, I have no idea.

What's your plan sport?  If you were president with a willing congress hanging on your every word, what would be your top 5 moves.

Hell, I'll take 1, since you have never answered a direct question in this thread yet.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


I haven't listened to "right wing" radio once in my life, the closest connection I even have to it was listening to a speech at school given by Ron Kuby of all people.  Even worse, if I'm in the car I'm probably listening to WFAN or ESPN.

A congress hanging onto his every word? You must be referencing the period in this country between 08-10. The minority party has already stated its goal of obstruction. Entrenched republicans look at him as an outsider freak up. Now the Freedom Caucus (who admittedly I sympathize with in the healthcare debate) and him are going to war on social media.

What would I do? I would've focused my first 100 days on absolute lay-ups that have now been made impossible because he chose a dinosaur as AG. By that I mean, seeking to impose term limits, ending the for profit penitentiary system in this country, declassifying maryjane as a schedule I drug at the very least, etc. Easy policy positions that would've garnered favor from Republicans under the age of 50, and left leaning indy's in this country.  However, considering the ridiculous fallout that Spicer received on the issue of weed alone by saying nothing other than basic constitutional law (yes folks we have this thing called federal supremacy in this country), nothing other then the fact that this administration would essentially be like the last in terms of federal legislation when it comes to decriminalization, there's no doubt in my mind that we have pockets in the media that would absolutely excrement on Trump no matter what. But I also have faith that we have an electorate thats ever increasingly hip to their jive.
 
Republicans hate womens health.  Nice victory today.  You all must be proud.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Actually, one can be nuanced enough to be pro-choice but understand that Planned Parenthood has become a complete racket. But of course, that would run completely counter to your worldview. Its easier just to say Republicans hate women. Nevermind all the ridiculous attacks on Melania based on nothing but her appearance and pictures she took in the early 90's. Such slut shaming from the tolerant, pro-woman left!

Taking the entire issue of whether abortions are in fact subsidized despite being prohibited from doing so by the Hyde Amendment (and Forbes had a good article objectively looking at the issue, https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2015/10/02/are-american-taxpayers-paying-for-abortion/#44b281706a4b) the second someone can explain to me why Cecille Richards and the rest of the executives at Planned Parenthood need to hold incredibly swanky and expensive events on our dime, I'll change my tune. When an entity becomes corrupt, destroy the entity and go elsewhere. Planned Parenthood are lying sacks of excrement on so many claims, whether we're talking about them offering prenatal care or lying about how they gain revenue. Good bye forever hopefully.

On abortion, I feel like we'd all be a lot better off if instead of allowing politicians to play scientists on both sides of the aisle or trying to appease people on either extreme of the debate (total proscription or abortion on demand), until science settles the question of when life begins, we just keep the Roe standard. It's the best we're going to do for now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 30, 2017, 04:20:39 PM
When I posed my question, it was hypothetical.  You are the president and have a sympathetic congress.

I am 100% behind all 3 items you mentioned.  All are liberal policies, so that was unexpected.

As for planned parenthood, I would some sources for this wide spread corruption, as you would think it would get more press, considering the press the fake videos got a couple years ago.

Lets be honest, republicans want to kill PP because abortion, not corruption.  And the vast majority of americans have no clue that no tax money goes to abortions.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 30, 2017, 06:09:21 PM
Republicans hate womens health.  Nice victory today.  You all must be proud.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


See this is you spewing stupid excrement. Most women are not poor or on medicaid. If you said see, Republicans hate poor people I'd say you have a much stronger leg to stand on. But planned parenthood is an extremely partisan political organization (that does provide good services for poor communities)

And if Democrats wanted to defund some religious organization that provides services for the community I know you wouldn't be saying OMG the Democrats hate Christians.

Have you realized yet that your hyperpartisanship is a terrible thing ? And that goes for the looney toons on both sides of the aisle
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 30, 2017, 06:53:16 PM
Maybe if some states stop crusading against abortion then people will stop clinging to PP. Take away federally subsidized PP and many parts of the country will be left with no access to safe abortion services.

Until then, saying you're pro-choice but oppose federal funding of abortion just makes you a tool of the religious right. (Not just directed at you MJ as this is not an uncommon stance I've seen among my more libertarian peers)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 30, 2017, 07:31:16 PM
Maybe if some states stop crusading against abortion then people will stop clinging to PP. Take away federally subsidized PP and many parts of the country will be left with no access to safe abortion services.

Until then, saying you're pro-choice but oppose federal funding of abortion just makes you a tool of the religious right. (Not just directed at you MJ as this is not an uncommon stance I've seen among my more libertarian peers)

"I don't care if people get abortions but I object to paying for it."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 30, 2017, 08:12:00 PM
Maybe if some states stop crusading against abortion then people will stop clinging to PP. Take away federally subsidized PP and many parts of the country will be left with no access to safe abortion services.

Until then, saying you're pro-choice but oppose federal funding of abortion just makes you a tool of the religious right. (Not just directed at you MJ as this is not an uncommon stance I've seen among my more libertarian peers)

Good nuanced view.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 30, 2017, 09:06:55 PM
Hell I don't even mind federal funding paying for abortions, as it's a helluva lot cheaper than paying for a lifetime of handouts and incarceration for these children who will have the odds stacked against them the entire life.

But planned parenthood is a very partisan organization, and as a result many people hate them.

Also I'd be willing to bet the overwhelming majority of abortions happen in innercities not bumble freak middle of nowhere. So I find it hard to believe that planned parenthood is the only place you can terminate your baby in new york freaking city
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 30, 2017, 09:23:12 PM
How is PP partisan?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 30, 2017, 09:39:15 PM
Good nuanced view.

Is it? Because by the same logic, by supporting corporate welfare, he's really just a tool for all the fatcats and 1 percenters in this country.

I don't actually believe that, but that would be the same logic would it not?

How is PP partisan?

I don't know, maybe the fact that they make donations exclusively to democratic candidates. If they were a privately funded company I really could care less. 500 million in taxpayer funds should come with strings attached, one being no political donations of any kind, much less in such a flagrantly partisan manner.

I didn't even know about this until right now because of course the AP would freaking ignore it, but we currently have a situation where the AG of California has received thousands upon thousands of dollars from Planned Parenthood, and is yet refusing to recuse himself from the prosecution of two pro-life activists who recorded PP executives back in 2015 talking about selling fetal tissue to research organizations (direct violation of federal law).  Thats kosher to you?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 30, 2017, 10:00:12 PM
Hell I don't even mind federal funding paying for abortions, as it's a helluva lot cheaper than paying for a lifetime of handouts and incarceration for these children who will have the odds stacked against them the entire life.

But planned parenthood is a very partisan organization, and as a result many people hate them.

Also I'd be willing to bet the overwhelming majority of abortions happen in innercities not bumble freak middle of nowhere. So I find it hard to believe that planned parenthood is the only place you can terminate your baby in new york freaking city
Missing the entire point of my post - what about the people outside cities, especially in red states?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 30, 2017, 10:06:38 PM
Missing the entire point of my post - what about the people outside cities, especially in red states?

Then those people will likely have issues with access to all Healthcare and not just abortion. Not to mention many of those states (red states) have very restrictive laws that make seeking and obtaining an abortion fat more complicated than it nerds to be

My point was the majority of the population lives in   dense urban areas where they would have access to public transportation and a plethora of options.

Look I'm cool with abortion and support the economics of paying for other people's abortions. That doesn't stop me from hating a highly political organization like PP though
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 30, 2017, 10:15:43 PM
Is it? Because by the same logic, by supporting corporate welfare, he's really just a tool for all the fatcats and 1 percenters in this country.

I don't actually believe that, but that would be the same logic would it not? 

Actually, I don't think it is. Some states are making creative legislation that's trying to abolish all abortion in a way to circumvent Roe v. Wade, you know basically making it so onerous that no one fits the criteria to be a Dr at a clinic or can legally be a patient there.

 Circling back to the SCOTUS nominee, Gorsuch, and the question of RvW. (who I can't stand for a myriad of reasons but nothing to do with Roe v. Wade as I agree with him). He answered it perfectly, it's the rule of law now, it's precedent. Basically, shut the freak up and accept it. But no they can't do that.

So no I don't really agree about the corporate welfare devils advocate argument, because it's not both ways, it's one way. I am sorry but if you let the religious right dictate social policy this country will be in the freaking stone age inside of 20 years.

BTW, I honestly don't give three shits about PP, I care about women that can properly get an abortion by a real Dr and not some midwife armed with a wire hanger. (yeah the last part is hyperbole but you get the point). Also if something rustles the jimmies of the religious right, I am for it......I hate those fuckers with a passion.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 30, 2017, 10:25:08 PM
Then those people will likely have issues with access to all Healthcare and not just abortion. Not to mention many of those states (red states) have very restrictive laws that make seeking and obtaining an abortion fat more complicated than it nerds to be

My point was the majority of the population lives in   dense urban areas where they would have access to public transportation and a plethora of options.

Look I'm cool with abortion and support the economics of paying for other people's abortions. That doesn't stop me from hating a highly political organization like PP though

Again, ignoring my point.

If abortion rights can be protected across all 50 states, other entities will spring up to provide these services, and the federal government will no longer need to overreach in this area. Then defund PP and let them compete in the infallible, glorious free market that fixes all things. The invisible hand, holding a coat hanger!

But right now, we'll keep subsidizing them federally while we wait for some states to catch up to the 20th (let's aim low) century.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 30, 2017, 10:32:01 PM
I want to add that it is patently absurd to base your vote for a SCOTUS nominee on their Roe v. Wade stance. The fact that these dickhead politicians use it as a benchmark is so beyond freaking stupid. There are so many more nuanced rulings that can accurately gauge a judges leanings it blows my mind.

Honestly, I couldn't care less about a judge's RvW stance. I am much more interested in his other more important rulings that actually deal with far more likely circumstances than an obscure abortion case.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 30, 2017, 10:43:23 PM
Is it? Because by the same logic, by supporting corporate welfare, he's really just a tool for all the fatcats and 1 percenters in this country.

I don't actually believe that, but that would be the same logic would it not?

As soon as we invade another country or crash the housing market because of pro-choice billionaires let me know. Until then I don't think it's a specific problem we need to focus on.

Since dcm still probably isn't getting it, I'll reiterate: until abortion rights are protected in every state, it's not unreasonable for the federal government to back the largest organization fighting for it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 30, 2017, 10:50:18 PM
Actually, I don't think it is. Some states are making creative legislation that's trying to abolish all abortion in a way to circumvent Roe v. Wade, you know basically making it so onerous that no one fits the criteria to be a Dr at a clinic or can legally be a patient there.

Circling back to the SCOTUS nominee, Gorsuch, and the question of RvW. (who I can't stand for a myriad of reasons but nothing to do with Roe v. Wade as I agree with him). He answered it perfectly, it's the rule of law now, it's precedent. Basically, shut the freak up and accept it. But no they can't do that.

So no I don't really agree about the corporate devils advocate argument, because it's not both ways, it's one way. I am sorry but if you let the religious right dictate social policy this country will be in the freaking stone age inside of 20 years.

BTW, I honestly don't give three shits about PP, I care about women that can properly get an abortion by a real Dr and not some midwife armed with a wire hanger. (yeah the last part is hyperbole but you get the point). Also if something rustles the jimmies of the religious right, I am for it......I hate those fuckers with a passion.

Here is the logic: If I as someone who's pro-choice doesn't believe in the federal funding of abortion (which I never said, I'm just not in favor of a corrupt entity like PP being the one to get those dollars), I'm a tool of the religious right.

My counter is, if Badger believes in corporate welfare, then he's just a tool for all the fat cats and 1 percenters in this country.

Essentially, the logic is well if you aren't 100 percent in lockstep on this issue, really you're unwittingly just a tool for a side that you'd otherwise be in stark contrast too, and I'm going to label you as such. I just don't agree with that at all. I can absolutely believe that PP is a corrupt entity that needs to get shitcanned ASAP, and not be a "tool for the religious right."

I'm not sure if you've all noticed, but the religious right is dying anyway. The religious right is Glenn Beck, it's Ben Sasse, it's never Trump conservatives for the most part who either bent the knee after Trump threw them a bone with Pence, or like Beck, continue to just fade into absolute irrelevance, while the only act that did anything on their rinky dink site moves to the bright lights of Fox. (And for the record I find Tomi annoying as excrement, but I get a big kick out of people who have to put on full blast how annoying she is then sharing absolute drivel from Keith freaking Olbermann.) But the religious right is becoming increasingly more irrelevant. Why else do you think that hatchet-job on Milo was perpetrated by members of said group? It wasn't liberals that tried to smear him, and its simply because no one under the age of 50 has any use for them, and the new mark of conservatism won't come from Christian traditionalism but libertarian principles. Their grasp isn't slipping, it's completely loosened.

As far as states making creative legislation, it's not a concern for me because the bills that are truly whacked out (ones demanding by the inch zone requirements, unreasonable and unusual demands for drs etc.) , are usually shut down by the judiciary the second a whacked out governor tries to sign them into law. And if some of that legislation that is considered creative includes bills banning abortions after 20 weeks, or imposing at least SOME standards like Kermit Gosnell didn't exist, then freak it. If you really want me to take all the emotional elements out of it, fine, it's still a medical procedure and a potentially dangerous one at that. How does that not bare regulation, and this is coming from someone  opposed to an over-intrusive government whenever and wherever possible?

Out of curiosity, why the hatred for Gorsuch? The funny part was after his Roe answer was that neither side was deterred into either painting him as the next Scalia for better or worse.

As soon as we invade another country or crash the housing market because of pro-choice billionaires let me know. Until then I don't think it's a specific problem we need to focus on.

Since dcm still probably isn't getting it, I'll reiterate: until abortion rights are protected in every state, it's not unreasonable for the federal government to back the largest organization fighting for it.

The entire platform of the guy you voted for was that corporate welfare and the 1 percent are the cause of all of the societal ills of this country.

I'd agree with your second statement if abortion rights weren't so vague a term. I'll just say this, my definition of abortion rights and PP's definition of abortion rights are definitely in contrast to each other. But then, this is what I'm talking about when people don't want to adhere to Roe. They're just as guilty as the Mike Huckadouche's of the world.

It's not unreasonable for the political party that's in the majority in every conceivable way to want to cut the funding of an entity that has a 100 percent donation output to the opposition.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 30, 2017, 10:53:16 PM
So which alternative entity are you in favor of receiving federal funding for abortion?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 30, 2017, 11:14:39 PM
So which alternative entity are you in favor of receiving federal funding for abortion?

So because PP is the only organization thats currently afforded 500 million to bolster their infrastructure, they have cart blanche and can't be replaced? If anything, this dependency is another reason to give them the heave ho. It's 2017. Given 500 million and the private donations that would be sure to flow in the second another company was given that funding and therefore the recognition and responsibility of taking PP's place not to mention the subsequent positive recognition from the media, hollywood etc. you'd have no shortage of volunteers.

Again, my gripe has nothing to do with the issue of abortion as much as the fact that the company that has been entrusted with tax dollars are a bunch of corrupt liars that have now directly gotten involved in our political process. I don't think its a stretch to assume that Kamala Harris's support of legislation that allows non doctors for fucks sake to perform this procedure is directly tied to the fact that she's on their donation list.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 30, 2017, 11:26:31 PM
See this is you spewing stupid excrement. Most women are not poor or on medicaid. If you said see, Republicans hate poor people I'd say you have a much stronger leg to stand on. But planned parenthood is an extremely partisan political organization (that does provide good services for poor communities)

And if Democrats wanted to defund some religious organization that provides services for the community I know you wouldn't be saying OMG the Democrats hate Christians.

Have you realized yet that your hyperpartisanship is a terrible thing ? And that goes for the looney toons on both sides of the aisle
You literally are bipolar.

You said PP does good things.  Its not just poor women.  Its millions of college women as well.  If it does good things, and millions of women use it for yearly screening and family planning, why defund it.  Answer in my previous post.

The government, to the best of my knowledge, does not fund churches, and doesnt tax for profit mega churches either.  That's a debate for another day.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 30, 2017, 11:45:22 PM
A couple notes.

Badger:  None of the federal funding received by PP is used for abortions.  At least it is illegal for it to be.

DCM:  What makes you feel that PP is corrupt?  The videos you mentioned from a couple years ago was proven to be a scam.  Even far right wingers don't talk about it anymore.

Are they corrupt because they donate publically donated funds to politicians?

Do tell.

Gorsuch.  I would have no problem with him if the Turtle hadn't done something entirely unprecedented with Garland.  Don't talk to me about who said this or that in hypothetical.  It never happened before.

I know the guy hates RvW, gays, womens rights, etc.  Whatever.  What else would you expect from a republican nominee?

The thing that got me, yes I happened to watch some of his hearing, was the truck driver story that Franken brought up.  Not going to type you the transcript.  Also, the way he spoke to the female senator was totally fucked up.

He has a great resume and acts the part, but beyond his expected flaws, he has deeper rooted issues.

With that said, without the Garland situation, I would let the vote go.  No way he would get to 60, but I would not even considered the filibuster.  This is a different story.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 31, 2017, 05:31:02 AM
A couple notes.

Badger:  None of the federal funding received by PP is used for abortions.  At least it is illegal for it to be.

DCM:  What makes you feel that PP is corrupt?  The videos you mentioned from a couple years ago was proven to be a scam.  Even far right wingers don't talk about it anymore.

Are they corrupt because they donate publically donated funds to politicians?

Do tell.

Gorsuch.  I would have no problem with him if the Turtle hadn't done something entirely unprecedented with Garland.  Don't talk to me about who said this or that in hypothetical.  It never happened before.

I know the guy hates RvW, gays, womens rights, etc.  Whatever.  What else would you expect from a republican nominee?

The thing that got me, yes I happened to watch some of his hearing, was the truck driver story that Franken brought up.  Not going to type you the transcript.  Also, the way he spoke to the female senator was totally fucked up.

He has a great resume and acts the part, but beyond his expected flaws, he has deeper rooted issues.

With that said, without the Garland situation, I would let the vote go.  No way he would get to 60, but I would not even considered the filibuster.  This is a different story.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


I don't recall saying corrupt, although it's entirely possible I don't remember
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 31, 2017, 08:34:49 AM
A couple notes.

Badger:  None of the federal funding received by PP is used for abortions.  At least it is illegal for it to be.

DCM:  What makes you feel that PP is corrupt?  The videos you mentioned from a couple years ago was proven to be a scam.  Even far right wingers don't talk about it anymore.

Are they corrupt because they donate publically donated funds to politicians?

Do tell.

Gorsuch.  I would have no problem with him if the Turtle hadn't done something entirely unprecedented with Garland.  Don't talk to me about who said this or that in hypothetical.  It never happened before.

I know the guy hates RvW, gays, womens rights, etc.  Whatever.  What else would you expect from a republican nominee?

The thing that got me, yes I happened to watch some of his hearing, was the truck driver story that Franken brought up.  Not going to type you the transcript.  Also, the way he spoke to the female senator was totally fucked up.

He has a great resume and acts the part, but beyond his expected flaws, he has deeper rooted issues.

With that said, without the Garland situation, I would let the vote go.  No way he would get to 60, but I would not even considered the filibuster.  This is a different story.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

I know we're in the habit of calling each others posts on politics gigantic blocks of excrement, but this one does really take the cake.

1. According to the Hyde Amendment technically you're correct, but the Forbes article I linked states after a fairly comprehensive analysis that a quarter of abortions are federally subsidized. If someone who's better at forensic accounting (given my math skills, probably anyone on this board) can take a look at that study and refute it, I'm all ears.

2. Those videos by Project Veritas were never proven to be a "scam." They were never doctored or selectively edited as PP would like you to believe. This is a flat out lie.

And yes, but that's only half the reason. As I've stated, its bad enough to donate to politicians with public funds, but these people that are getting cash are actually acting on their conflict of interest. I already went into how deep their fingers are in politics and even worse, functions of what is supposed to be an independent and non-biased judiciary in California.

3. It only didn't happen before because there was no situation in 1992 for Bush to name a new judge with one year left in his Presidency. Or am I not supposed to take Clueless Joe at his word at the time, that denying a confirmation hearing is EXACTLY what they would've done? Again, there is no Constitutional demand that a President has his nomination confirmed. The senate is not a rubber stamp. This is basic civics.

4. There is literally no basis behind this comment, and this is predominantly how you discredit yourself. Hyperbolic rhetoric with no basis in reality will do that. It's like you're not even aware that the swing vote in Obergfell was cast by one of those "RETHUGLIKKKANS OMGG!"

5. This push to blame a judge for attempting to enforce a law on record is an indication that people have a fundamental misunderstanding of the role a justice is supposed to play. They don't make laws. They interpret them. If you have a problem with the letter of the law, in this case blame the assholes that wrote it, not the Judgewho's enforcing it. Or, you know. Doing his job. Judge's only get to strike down what is unconstitutional, not what's dumb. We have an entire legislative process for that. But, when you have sitting senators (Kamala Harris making another appearance, she really is a freaking idiot) saying, "Judge Gorsuch has consistently valued narrow legalisms over real lives." Oh. So in other words you mean as a Judge he's followed the freaking LAW which is exactly what he's supposed to do. Again, this is the system we've had for 250 years. Unless something is blatantly unconstitutional, you don't go through the judiciary to get a law changed, that is the job of the legislative branch.

6. So out of curiosity, if Merrick Garland had gotten his hearing and then been denied confirmation, then what? Is it still "a situation?" Again, what was the logical endgame of that entire mess, besides him getting a denial because no matter how hard you want to believe it, the man is a liberal judge up against a conservative senate majority?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on March 31, 2017, 09:34:33 AM
I know we're in the habit of calling each others posts on politics gigantic blocks of excrement, but this one does really take the cake.

1. According to the Hyde Amendment technically you're correct, but the Forbes article I linked states after a fairly comprehensive analysis that a quarter of abortions are federally subsidized. If someone who's better at forensic accounting (given my math skills, probably anyone on this board) can take a look at that study and refute it, I'm all ears.

2. Those videos by Project Veritas were never proven to be a "scam." They were never doctored or selectively edited as PP would like you to believe. This is a flat out lie.

And yes, but that's only half the reason. As I've stated, its bad enough to donate to politicians with public funds, but these people that are getting cash are actually acting on their conflict of interest. I already went into how deep their fingers are in politics and even worse, functions of what is supposed to be an independent and non-biased judiciary in California.

3. It only didn't happen before because there was no situation in 1992 for Bush to name a new judge with one year left in his Presidency. Or am I not supposed to take Clueless Joe at his word at the time, that denying a confirmation hearing is EXACTLY what they would've done? Again, there is no Constitutional demand that a President has his nomination confirmed. The senate is not a rubber stamp. This is basic civics.

4. There is literally no basis behind this comment, and this is predominantly how you discredit yourself. Hyperbolic rhetoric with no basis in reality will do that. It's like you're not even aware that the swing vote in Obergfell was cast by one of those "RETHUGLIKKKANS OMGG!"

5. This push to blame a judge for attempting to enforce a law on record is an indication that people have a fundamental misunderstanding of the role a justice is supposed to play. They don't make laws. They interpret them. If you have a problem with the letter of the law, in this case blame the assholes that wrote it, not the Judgewho's enforcing it. Or, you know. Doing his job. Judge's only get to strike down what is unconstitutional, not what's dumb. We have an entire legislative process for that. But, when you have sitting senators (Kamala Harris making another appearance, she really is a freaking idiot) saying, "Judge Gorsuch has consistently valued narrow legalisms over real lives." Oh. So in other words you mean as a Judge he's followed the freaking LAW which is exactly what he's supposed to do. Again, this is the system we've had for 250 years. Unless something is blatantly unconstitutional, you don't go through the judiciary to get a law changed, that is the job of the legislative branch.

6. So out of curiosity, if Merrick Garland had gotten his hearing and then been denied confirmation, then what? Is it still "a situation?" Again, what was the logical endgame of that entire mess, besides him getting a denial because no matter how hard you want to believe it, the man is a liberal judge up against a conservative senate majority?

If 1 and 2a had any validity it should have been prosecuted.  It was in fact investigated, so do the math.  I could into detail about the videos, but there is no need.

You can thank citizens united for 2b.  I'm all for pulling money out of politics, but for now it is what it is.  Haven't heard you crying foul about the NRA.

I clearly said 3 was unprecedented.  Biden saying something but nothing happening is not the same as something happening.  If it had, it would have been wrong back then as well.  Would you be OK with the dems fillibustering every pick until 2021?  Should a president under investigation for possible treason be allowed to appoint a judge?  What if his name was Obama?

In regards to 4, looking at his rulings he is cleary no friend to gays or womens rights.  His interpretation of the laws in such cases show a clear bias, which you agree is not a good thing.

With 5 Gorsuch was the lone dissenting judge.  The law he invoked had an absurdatiy clause.  Every judge but him agreed that it would have been absurd for the driver to die to protect his job.  Gorsuch didn't even try to dispute the facts of the case when questioned by Franken.

As for 6 if Gorsuch had got Borked then so be it.  He didn't even get a hearing.  As it stands, independant polling shows he could have received up to 80 votes.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on March 31, 2017, 09:44:19 AM
Fenwyr

It is a waste of your time to try and present facts, truth or logic to low IQ Fox News  GOP trailer trash Trumpbots

They will support his treason and insanity to the end, which it appears won't be that far in the future


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 31, 2017, 09:49:03 AM
5. This push to blame a judge for attempting to enforce a law on record is an indication that people have a fundamental misunderstanding of the role a justice is supposed to play. They don't make laws. They interpret them. If you have a problem with the letter of the law, in this case blame the assholes that wrote it, not the Judgewho's enforcing it. Or, you know. Doing his job. Judge's only get to strike down what is unconstitutional, not what's dumb. We have an entire legislative process for that. But, when you have sitting senators (Kamala Harris making another appearance, she really is a freaking idiot) saying, "Judge Gorsuch has consistently valued narrow legalisms over real lives." Oh. So in other words you mean as a Judge he's followed the freaking LAW which is exactly what he's supposed to do. Again, this is the system we've had for 250 years. Unless something is blatantly unconstitutional, you don't go through the judiciary to get a law changed, that is the job of the legislative branch.

In my humble non legal opinion, I think there's a lot of grey area in Law. You can interpret to the letter of the law or use sound judgement as to what you think the law means. Either way is an option or use a little bit of both. Gorsuch , to me is a mean spirited letter of the law guy and quite frankly, I do not like him and do not feel he should be a SCOTUS Justice.

Consistently, throughout his career, Gorsuch has gone against the little guy even in dissenting opinions. He's fairly consistent with this. For instance, the Madden/Transam Trucking case. The guy was freezing to freaking death and he still ruled in favor of the company firing the guy, letter of the law my poopchute ( again he just kind of pisses me off for some reason). The law wasn't written to protect a company in such extenuating circumstances.

I suppose if you ( I mean Gorsuch not "you") want to be a freaking mean poopchute then sure side with the company. Also, he has a ruling overturned by the SCOTUS a few years back, I don't know remember exactly which one but it was similar to the Madden/Transam case and the SCOTUS unanimously overturned that. Judge Roberts wrote an opinion on it.
 The fact the SCOTUS overturned one of his decisions isn't my issue, lots of judges have that happen. My issue is once again he sided with the corporation in a rather obtuse way.

It's my opinion he is a mean spirited complete and utter douchebag and I want no part of him on the SCOTUS. I wasn't too particularly fond of Scalia, at first, but he was a genuinely nice well informed Justice. While he adhered to a strict adherence to Constitutional Law, there were times where he at least budged, I think the case I am trying to remember that Roberts wrote an opinion on was one of those times.

Also, he was great friends with many of the people he consistently dissented. That more than anything is a measure of character. I do not think Gorsuch is of such character. It's my opinion only, I do not like him one bit. 

I will be on record that I like judges to be more liberal and for politicians to be more conservative/libertarian. Unfortunately, my Utopia will probably never ever happen.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 31, 2017, 11:05:47 AM


So because PP is the only organization thats currently afforded 500 million to bolster their infrastructure, they have cart blanche and can't be replaced?

It was an honest question. What's the specific alternative? Let's support it so we can stop these ostensibly corrupt execs from lining their pockets with taxpayer money.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 31, 2017, 11:13:43 AM
I don't know, maybe the fact that they make donations exclusively to democratic candidates. If they were a privately funded company I really could care less. 500 million in taxpayer funds should come with strings attached, one being no political donations of any kind, much less in such a flagrantly partisan manner.

That seems a little chicken and egg. In a two party system where one party broadly supports your mandate and a large part of the other explicitly wishes to kill you off, or at least one of your most important functions, it's hard to criticise them for having a preference. They're not a government department, so they're not required to be apolitical.

And money is fungible. If Federal funding was their whole source of income then perhaps I'd have a degree more sympathy, but they also receive huge amounts from various other sources. It's entirely reasonable to argue that their political contributions come from donations from the Gates Foundation and that the federal monies are used for the provision of healthcare.

Quote
I didn't even know about this until right now because of course the AP would freaking ignore it, but we currently have a situation where the AG of California has received thousands upon thousands of dollars from Planned Parenthood, and is yet refusing to recuse himself from the prosecution of two pro-life activists who recorded PP executives back in 2015 talking about selling fetal tissue to research organizations (direct violation of federal law).  Thats kosher to you?

No less kosher than an AG receiving campaign contributions from the NRA but refusing to recuse himself from any 2A-related case. I don't think you can purely stick the issue of campaign finance and the resulting conflicts of interest on PP - that's a much wider problem.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 31, 2017, 11:46:43 AM
Fenwyr

It is a waste of your time to try and present facts, truth or logic to low IQ Fox News  GOP trailer trash Trumpbots

They will support his treason and insanity to the end, which it appears won't be that far in the future




Suicide
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 01, 2017, 01:35:08 PM
The irony for you anti gun folks

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/01/without-obama-once-booming-gun-industry-poised-to-shrink.amp.html

Under Obama gun sales completely soared, under Trump theyve dropped almost 20% since he got elected
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 01, 2017, 01:53:45 PM
The irony for you anti gun folks

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/01/without-obama-once-booming-gun-industry-poised-to-shrink.amp.html

Under Obama gun sales completely soared, under Trump theyve dropped almost 20% since he got elected

Well gun enthusiasts stockpiled because of the threat of new gun control laws etc. Sales will obviously decline after a big few years like that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 01, 2017, 01:58:50 PM
Well gun enthusiasts stockpiled because of the threat of new gun control laws etc. Sales will obviously decline after a big few years like that.
Yeah, but still

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 01, 2017, 02:01:07 PM
Yeah, but still

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Consumer retail is dying, and since you can't buy guns online it's gonna get even tougher.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 01, 2017, 02:53:10 PM
Consumer retail is dying, and since you can't buy guns online it's gonna get even tougher.
I was kidding and answering for dcm.

You were spot on.  Obama was gunna take der guns, so sales went through the roof.  No shock at all that sales dropped off.  In 4-8 years it will be, Newsom is gonna take er guns, and sales will go back up.  The difference is Obama never had any intention to, Newsom or someone like him is far more likely to go after the NRA.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 01, 2017, 03:21:41 PM
I was kidding and answering for dcm.

You were spot on.  Obama was gunna take der guns, so sales went through the roof.  No shock at all that sales dropped off.  In 4-8 years it will be, Newsom is gonna take er guns, and sales will go back up.  The difference is Obama never had any intention to, Newsom or someone like him is far more likely to go after the NRA.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

It's not even about that since I don't think you can buy guns online, and when the brick and mortar stores go, where are you gonna get them?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 01, 2017, 04:04:18 PM
Technically you can buy a gun online - you just have to get it shipped to a dealer to pick it up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 03, 2017, 09:24:26 PM
My sister in law is still blaming Sanders for Clinton losing the election (FB posts). It's hard not to respond but it's not worth the number of jimmies that would be rustled.

If the Dem party leadership goes into 2020 with that mentality, they will absolutely lose again and they'll deserve it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 04, 2017, 09:28:16 AM
My sister in law is still blaming Sanders for Clinton losing the election (FB posts). It's hard not to respond but it's not worth the number of jimmies that would be rustled.

If the Dem party leadership goes into 2020 with that mentality, they will absolutely lose again and they'll deserve it.
I voted for Sanders in the primary.  Held my nose and voted for Clinton in the general.  Clinton had nothing to do with the 'scandal'.  Screw the DNC.  The too cool for school Sanders supporters voting third party or not at all elected Trump, and they should own it as much as Russia.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 04, 2017, 10:06:59 AM
I voted for Sanders in the primary.  Held my nose and voted for Clinton in the general.  Clinton had nothing to do with the 'scandal'.  Screw the DNC.  The too cool for school Sanders supporters voting third party or not at all elected Trump, and they should own it as much as Russia.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
No.

Sent from my VS500 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on April 04, 2017, 10:59:33 AM
m'Russians
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 04, 2017, 11:15:09 AM
She just shitposted another article about how Sanders is to blame for white liberalism, or something.

Sent from my VS500 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 04, 2017, 02:58:24 PM
I voted for Sanders in the primary.  Held my nose and voted for Clinton in the general.  Clinton had nothing to do with the 'scandal'.  Screw the DNC.  The too cool for school Sanders supporters voting third party or not at all elected Trump, and they should own it as much as Russia.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



How is it the 3rd party Sanders voters fault Trump got elected?

Sanders is a joke even more out of touch with reality than Trump, and belongs nowhere near the white house. But he got absolutely majorly freaking railroaded by the DNC and Hillary Clinton in an extremely rigged corrupt process. They did America a favor for not voting for Clinton, by making the political parties see Americans don't want none of that fucked up excrement.

Republicans tried to do the same thing against Trump they just failed at it, and didn't have a machine as well oiled and powerful ad the Clinton's
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 04, 2017, 03:34:12 PM
No.

Sent from my VS500 using Tapatalk
I didn't think you would like that.  I wasn't happy voting for Clinton, but not voting is stupid, and protest voting gets guys like Trump elected.

Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania

The no votes and protest votes would have made the difference.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 04, 2017, 03:35:02 PM
How is it the 3rd party Sanders voters fault Trump got elected?

Sanders is a joke even more out of touch with reality than Trump, and belongs nowhere near the white house. But he got absolutely majorly freaking railroaded by the DNC and Hillary Clinton in an extremely rigged corrupt process. They did America a favor for not voting for Clinton, by making the political parties see Americans don't want none of that fucked up excrement.

Republicans tried to do the same thing against Trump they just failed at it, and didn't have a machine as well oiled and powerful ad the Clinton's
Saying Sanders is more out of touch than Trump?  Holy excrement dude.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 04, 2017, 03:40:29 PM
Saying Sanders is more out of touch than Trump?  Holy excrement dude.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Trump at least thinks like a businessman, we're a capitalistic society. While he's a jerk off among other things, he at least can relate to that and his populist platform. Sanders just wanted unicorns and rainbows and world peace, via a bunch of unrealistic absurd mechanims completely out of touch with American principles.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 04, 2017, 03:48:18 PM
I didn't think you would like that.  I wasn't happy voting for Clinton, but not voting is stupid, and protest voting gets guys like Trump elected.

Wisconsin, Michigan, Pennsylvania

The no votes and protest votes would have made the difference.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Again, no.

A. Sanders did everything in his power to campaign for Clinton in the general.

B. I live in a blue state, you live in a swing state. I and one million of my closest friends could have voted for Stein and Clinton would still get NY's 29 electoral votes.

C. Give every Stein vote to Clinton and she still loses PA, OH, FL. I'm being generous in this scenario by not giving any Johnson votes to Trump. If you want to wildly speculate the number of Sanders voters that stayed home, go ahead, but it's just feeding the narrative of the DNC's blame shifting.

If they keep doing this excrement they will lose again.

Sent from my VS500 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 04, 2017, 03:50:04 PM


Trump at least thinks like a businessman

Step 1: inherit fortune and massive company

Sent from my VS500 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 04, 2017, 04:34:44 PM
http://deadsp.in/Vm9F8YV

Sent from my VS500 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 04, 2017, 06:10:02 PM
Again, no.

A. Sanders did everything in his power to campaign for Clinton in the general.

B. I live in a blue state, you live in a swing state. I and one million of my closest friends could have voted for Stein and Clinton would still get NY's 29 electoral votes.

C. Give every Stein vote to Clinton and she still loses PA, OH, FL. I'm being generous in this scenario by not giving any Johnson votes to Trump. If you want to wildly speculate the number of Sanders voters that stayed home, go ahead, but it's just feeding the narrative of the DNC's blame shifting.

If they keep doing this excrement they will lose again.

Sent from my VS500 using Tapatalk
I will say again that I wish Bernie had won the nomination.  He would have killed Trump in the 3 states I listed.  All 3 went to Trump.  I should have included Bernie supporters that voted for Trump in my initial statement.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 04, 2017, 06:23:12 PM
Trump at least thinks like a businessman, we're a capitalistic society. While he's a jerk off among other things, he at least can relate to that and his populist platform. Sanders just wanted unicorns and rainbows and world peace, via a bunch of unrealistic absurd mechanims completely out of touch with American principles.
The country is not a business.  You got excrement upside down, which is likely why you, and Trump, don't seem to get it.

In the simplest of terms, a company works for a CEO, a government works for the people.

Sanders would love to have unicorns and rainbows, but at least he understands the process, and just wants to take incremental steps.

All, all of Sanders agenda has a majority of citizen support when taken piece by piece without his name or a political party associated with it.  Fact.

Again, when asked in a vacuum, the vast majority of americans want:

Universal health care
Free public education
Improved infrastructure
Less money in politics
Increased minimum wage
Equal wages for equal work

Just to name a few.

They do not want:

Tax cuts for the rich
More wars
Defunding planned parenthood
Repealing the ACA

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 04, 2017, 07:57:21 PM
Fact. Saying fact does not make something a fact.

Also a CEO works for the shareholders, which is much more similar to the government working for the people.

Of course its incredibly naive to think the government gives a freak about the people, because politicians biggest concern is really power and money, as well as backroom deals with their buddy's. That's both the left and right guilty of that
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 04, 2017, 08:21:58 PM
Fact. Saying fact does not make something a fact.

Also a CEO works for the shareholders, which is much more similar to the government working for the people.

Of course its incredibly naive to think the government gives a freak about the people, because politicians biggest concern is really power and money, as well as backroom deals with their buddy's. That's both the left and right guilty of that
You're right.  Facts make facts fact.  Feel free to lookup any independant survey that proves me wrong on those points.

I know plenty of self serving politicians exist on both sides, but one side tries to double down on the self serving with actual legislation.



Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 04, 2017, 08:34:48 PM
I will say again that I wish Bernie had won the nomination.  He would have killed Trump in the 3 states I listed.  All 3 went to Trump.  I should have included Bernie supporters that voted for Trump in my initial statement.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Now that we're somewhere on the same page I hope you can understand why I'd be annoyed by someone still shitting on him and his supporters across the board nearly half a year later. Not going to win any votes in 2020 if they're still telling people they're sexist for not voting for Clinton.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 04, 2017, 08:39:21 PM
You're right.  Facts make facts fact.  Feel free to lookup any independant survey that proves me wrong on those points.

I know plenty of self serving politicians exist on both sides, but one side tries to double down on the self serving with actual legislation.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


Yeah but they dont say the complete story. For example the majority of Americans do think there should be free college education. But they also dont think that it shouldnt increase federal taxes. And they also dont support loan forgiveness. So please explain to me what the freak that means ? Its like saying the majority of Americans support universal healthcare, if taxes go down and the quality increases and wait time decreases for healthcare.

These unrealistic make believe scenarios dont mean anything,
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 04, 2017, 09:17:51 PM
Yeah but they dont say the complete story. For example the majority of Americans do think there should be free college education. But they also dont think that it shouldnt increase federal taxes. And they also dont support loan forgiveness. So please explain to me what the freak that means ? Its like saying the majority of Americans support universal healthcare, if taxes go down and the quality increases and wait time decreases for healthcare.

These unrealistic make believe scenarios dont mean anything,

They don't believe it should increase their federal taxes.

And your position assumes that there's nowhere else to find additional money than tax increases.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 04, 2017, 09:24:10 PM
They don't believe it should increase their federal taxes.

And your position assumes that there's nowhere else to find additional money than tax increases.

Considering we have an near insurmountable debt, id say thats a reasonable opinion

And tax hikes effect us all, well all those who pay taxes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 04, 2017, 09:26:01 PM
Considering we have an near insurmountable debt, id say thats a reasonable opinion

And tax hikes effect us all, well all those who pay taxes


Maybe if you had a greater percentage of the population with more education and less student debt you'd not have to worry so much about IT companies importing skills from overseas, but the problem with educated people is that they're less likely to buy guns and vote Republican so I can see why that would be an issue for your preferred rulers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 04, 2017, 09:35:54 PM
Maybe if you had a greater percentage of the population with more education and less student debt you'd not have to worry so much about IT companies importing skills from overseas, but the problem with educated people is that they're less likely to buy guns and vote Republican so I can see why that would be an issue for your preferred rulers.

Or maybe if more people with student debt got degrees they could get jobs with, they could pay off their student debt. The current biggest problem isnt the debt, its the debt with a worthless freaking degree that doesnt help you pay it off

Right now most college grads cant get a job, how is increasing that number going to help that fact ?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 04, 2017, 09:40:56 PM
Also you realize how obnoxious and ignorant you look when you make a generalization about uneducated voters being republican. You do realize that both parties strongest voting blocs are ignorant uneducated people
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 04, 2017, 09:51:51 PM
Or maybe if more people with student debt got degrees they could get jobs with, they could pay off their student debt. The current biggest problem isnt the debt, its the debt with a worthless freaking degree that doesnt help you pay it off

Right now most college grads cant get a job, how is increasing that number going to help that fact ?

Congratulations on completely missing the point. As usual.

It's late and I'm tired and I'm bored of doing this with you. Knock yourself out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 05, 2017, 12:27:35 AM
Or maybe if more people with student debt got degrees they could get jobs with, they could pay off their student debt. The current biggest problem isnt the debt, its the debt with a worthless freaking degree that doesnt help you pay it off

Right now most college grads cant get a job, how is increasing that number going to help that fact ?

The biggest problem is the debt.

You should put your imaginary economics degree (the one that everyone critical of Sanders has) to good use and figure it out. A marginally employable person with no debt is better for the economy than one with lots of debt, because they'll be spending their money on things that create jobs instead of paying off their crippling debt.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 01:23:18 AM
Now that we're somewhere on the same page I hope you can understand why I'd be annoyed by someone still shitting on him and his supporters across the board nearly half a year later. Not going to win any votes in 2020 if they're still telling people they're sexist for not voting for Clinton.
I would hope you know me a little better than that fam.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 01:26:28 AM
Congratulations on completely missing the point. As usual.

It's late and I'm tired and I'm bored of doing this with you. Knock yourself out.
Damnit, you were doing so well.  I'll tag in.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 01:35:02 AM
Considering we have an near insurmountable debt, id say thats a reasonable opinion

And tax hikes effect us all, well all those who pay taxes
1 out of 5 of the wealthiest corporations get more money back than they owe, the rest pay a marginal percentage of taxes.

Close tax loopholes.

Cut the defense budget in half.  We would still be outspending Russia and China combined.  How many never used tanks do we need to park in a desert graveyard?

I've already paid for eveything progressives want, with a surplus.  I could go on...

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 01:38:15 AM
Yeah but they dont say the complete story. For example the majority of Americans do think there should be free college education. But they also dont think that it shouldnt increase federal taxes. And they also dont support loan forgiveness. So please explain to me what the freak that means ? Its like saying the majority of Americans support universal healthcare, if taxes go down and the quality increases and wait time decreases for healthcare.

These unrealistic make believe scenarios dont mean anything,
They are not unrealistic in dozens of other democracies around the world.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 05, 2017, 08:27:24 AM
1 out of 5 of the wealthiest corporations get more money back than they owe, the rest pay a marginal percentage of taxes.

We should have a rule that you have to source claims such as these.

Quote
Close tax loopholes.

Which ones? You can't leave the tax rate the way it and then get rid of all deductions.

Quote
Cut the defense budget in half.  We would still be outspending Russia and China combined.  How many never used tanks do we need to park in a desert graveyard?

This is an incredibly simplistic view of the military and how it works. You can't just "cut it in half", especially when over 3 million jobs depend on the U.S armed forces, and not to mention a huge chunk of our military spending is spent on veteran pensions and benefits.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 05, 2017, 09:00:50 AM

This is an incredibly simplistic view of the military and how it works. You can't just "cut it in half", especially when over 3 million jobs depend on the U.S armed forces, and not to mention a huge chunk of our military spending is spent on veteran pensions and benefits.
This is very true. If you're going to cut defense you have to do it judiciously. There's a shitton of pork and the problem is Congressional Quid Pro Quo with defense spending. Good luck getting anything meaningful done here other than killing (not literal) the regular soldier.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 09:45:54 AM


We should have a rule that you have to source claims such as these.

Which ones? You can't leave the tax rate the way it and then get rid of all deductions.

This is an incredibly simplistic view of the military and how it works. You can't just "cut it in half", especially when over 3 million jobs depend on the U.S armed forces, and not to mention a huge chunk of our military spending is spent on veteran pensions and benefits.

I've read that number and heard it quoted enough times.  Feel free to look it up.  I can throw GE in there as an example.

If we had universal health care, we could eliminate the VA for the most part, if not entirely.  A much smaller entity could stick around to cover pensions and other benefits.

As far as emiminating military jobs, so what?  Like coal and other fossil fuel jobs, folks need to transition to the 21st century.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 05, 2017, 10:04:54 AM

I've read that number and heard it quoted enough times.  Feel free to look it up.  I can throw GE in there as an example.

I think you're referring to the report that 1 and 5 big companies paid no corporate taxes from 2009 to 2011 (link: http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/13/pf/taxes/gao-corporate-taxes/) Nothing about them "getting more than they paid", and I don't even know what you mean by that. That wasn't surprising considering many of the losses these companies incurred during the financial crisis, etc. It's  not unusual. But I do agree that we need corporate tax reform. Lower the rate, make it flat, and there will be no need for deductions. That includes personal income taxes as well. I'm all for that. We've spoken before about flat taxes across the board.

Also, I can't find anything about GE not paying corporate taxes, but I wouldn't be surprised if they had one year where they were able to write off losses sustained by GE Capital, which was going through some trouble during the financial crisis.

Quote
If we had universal health care, we could eliminate the VA for the most part, if not entirely.  A much smaller entity could stick around to cover pensions and other benefits.

You have to reform health care before you can just cut military spending. Otherwise you'll suddenly have millions of veterans inflating our Medicare and Medicaid budget, which will do way more harm than good. Those are two separate issues.

Quote
As far as emiminating military jobs, so what?  Like coal and other fossil fuel jobs, folks need to transition to the 21st century.

So what? Millions of active duty personnel and those who work for defense contractors suddenly out of a job and looking for work is a good thing? Your solution to reducing the debt and providing everyone with free higher education is to lay off millions of paid workers and having them stand on the unemployment line?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 05, 2017, 12:13:25 PM
I think you're referring to the report that 1 and 5 big companies paid no corporate taxes from 2009 to 2011 (link: http://money.cnn.com/2016/04/13/pf/taxes/gao-corporate-taxes/) Nothing about them "getting more than they paid", and I don't even know what you mean by that. That wasn't surprising considering many of the losses these companies incurred during the financial crisis, etc. It's  not unusual. But I do agree that we need corporate tax reform. Lower the rate, make it flat, and there will be no need for deductions. That includes personal income taxes as well. I'm all for that. We've spoken before about flat taxes across the board.

Also, I can't find anything about GE not paying corporate taxes, but I wouldn't be surprised if they had one year where they were able to write off losses sustained by GE Capital, which was going through some trouble during the financial crisis.

You have to reform health care before you can just cut military spending. Otherwise you'll suddenly have millions of veterans inflating our Medicare and Medicaid budget, which will do way more harm than good. Those are two separate issues.

So what? Millions of active duty personnel and those who work for defense contractors suddenly out of a job and looking for work is a good thing? Your solution to reducing the debt and providing everyone with free higher education is to lay off millions of paid workers and having them stand on the unemployment line?


Well sure the more unemployed workers receiving federal benefit the more likely they are to vote for some hippie socialist, who would then tax all the rich and give everybody free everything. Problem solved!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 05, 2017, 01:22:49 PM
This is very true. If you're going to cut defense you have to do it judiciously. There's a shitton of pork and the problem is Congressional Quid Pro Quo with defense spending. Good luck getting anything meaningful done here other than killing (not literal) the regular soldier.
The Republicans aren't afraid to make countless suggestions for how to shrink the civilian federal workforce, they could apply the same policies to military if their peers wouldn't start shrieking about how they're literally Bin Laden for cutting military spending.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 05, 2017, 01:23:33 PM

As far as emiminating military jobs, so what?  Like coal and other fossil fuel jobs, folks need to transition to the 21st century.


You can't complain about Trump and his supporters saying something as patently stupid as this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 05, 2017, 01:27:01 PM
The Republicans aren't afraid to make countless suggestions for how to shrink the civilian federal workforce, they could apply the same policies to military if their peers wouldn't start shrieking about how they're literally Bin Laden for cutting military spending.

I think we can all agree that the pork barrel spending is ridiculous, in particular the $12,000 hammer and $5000 screwdriver. The problem is the quid pro quo. I am all for getting rid of the pork, the Republicans and conversely the Democrats will all say the same thing. However, when it comes to their district they all have that needle in their arm.

The lucky thing is most soldiers can get their Bachelors free of cost and or have some of the best OJT there is. So in many respects they will be ok. I am ok with defense cuts and such if they're made where the guys that actually fight aren't the ones getting screwed over. However, that so rarely happens.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 05, 2017, 02:36:16 PM
The Republicans aren't afraid to make countless suggestions for how to shrink the civilian federal workforce, they could apply the same policies to military if their peers wouldn't start shrieking about how they're literally Bin Laden for cutting military spending.

But it's not just cutting staff (military personnel), it's the hundreds of defense contractors and sub-contractors that employ millions of people and rely on defense spending. You can't say the same about the Parks Department, etc. Cutting defense spending in half would be a massive blow to that industry, and those people, including the military personnel, would flood the labor market, and most will have to rely on unemployment insurance and Medicare. That'll only drive mandatory spending way up, forcing more cuts.

Simply put, $250b in defense cuts would add MORE to the deficit than it would take out. There are plenty of other ways to save $250b just by removing pork spending, as Puck said, and by increasing tax revenue through means other than raising taxes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 02:52:43 PM
I understand some of your points, but simplifying just to rip on the concept is childish.

Cutting defense spending in half over the next 10 years is absolutely doable.  Transitioning some the best trained people on the planet to civilian jobs, particularly in verticals that have a drought of talent is doable.  Transitioning those contractors to infrastructure doable.  Cutting needless spending on tanks and trillion dollar aircraft carriers, not to mention $2000 toilet seats is doable.

If insurance companies cannot survive by providing cadillac plans to the wealthy, too bad.  If american pharmaceuticals cannot compete with other countries prices, too bad.

Finding a fair corporate tax and eliminating loopholes would benefit small to mid size businesses bigly, without killing the large ones.

All of this would leave plenty of money for single payer health care.  Not having to pay for health insurance would be huge for smaller businesses.

Yes, its a dream, but nothing there is not doable.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 03:06:05 PM
And here's a radical idea.  Eliminate overseas tax shelters.  Allow the super rich to buy bonds pre tax to stow their cash, up to a certain amount.  I don't pretend to know what that amount should be.  But that alone could fund a massive infrastructue plan.

Let the government borrow from own wealthy citizens rather than other countries.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 05, 2017, 03:06:37 PM
I understand some of your points, but simplifying just to rip on the concept is childish.

Cutting defense spending in half over the next 10 years is absolutely doable.  Transitioning some the best trained people on the planet to civilian jobs, particularly in verticals that have a drought of talent is doable.  Transitioning those contractors to infrastructure doable.  Cutting needless spending on tanks and trillion dollar aircraft carriers, not to mention $2000 toilet seats is doable.

If insurance companies cannot survive by providing cadillac plans to the wealthy, too bad.  If american pharmaceuticals cannot compete with other countries prices, too bad.

Finding a fair corporate tax and eliminating loopholes would benefit small to mid size businesses bigly, without killing the large ones.

All of this would leave plenty of money for single payer health care.  Not having to pay for health insurance would be huge for smaller businesses.

Yes, its a dream, but nothing there is not doable.


There's nothing wrong with your opinion on cutting the military in this post, it's a lot better than saying freak the military, like your last post.

For all the corporate loopholes, the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world. It keeps foreign earned cash out of the country and significantly alters the economy in that respect. Make a deal and repatriate the cash and lower the corporate tax rate such that companies can profitably bring foreign earned money onshore. Then make it such that companies are not desperate to keep it in overseas banks. That will greatly improve our economy in the long run.

Lowering the corporate tax structure seems like a win for the big company but it actually will help the smaller ones as well. Besides, a well run small to midsize company can keep their profits to a minimum through legal means anyhow. Lowering the tax rate may behoove them to show a profit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 05, 2017, 03:08:34 PM
And here's a radical idea.  Eliminate overseas tax shelters.  Allow the super rich to buy bonds pre tax to stow their cash, up to a certain amount.  I don't pretend to know what that amount should be.  But that alone could fund a massive infrastructue plan.

Let the government borrow from own wealthy citizens rather than other countries.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


So fund the infrastructure plan by issuing more bonds, thus increasing our debt?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 05, 2017, 03:11:40 PM
So fund the infrastructure plan by issuing more bonds, thus increasing our debt?

I guess he means issue more municipal debt, which isn't necessarily a bad thing. Throughout history it has been shown to be a boon to growth.

However, I mean when it's done right. We all know, municipalities will issue more debt and then raise taxes because they can't pay for it all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 05, 2017, 03:13:06 PM
But it's not just cutting staff (military personnel), it's the hundreds of defense contractors and sub-contractors that employ millions of people and rely on defense spending. You can't say the same about the Parks Department, etc. Cutting defense spending in half would be a massive blow to that industry, and those people, including the military personnel, would flood the labor market, and most will have to rely on unemployment insurance and Medicare. That'll only drive mandatory spending way up, forcing more cuts.

Simply put, $250b in defense cuts would add MORE to the deficit than it would take out. There are plenty of other ways to save $250b just by removing pork spending, as Puck said, and by increasing tax revenue through means other than raising taxes.

I have to disagree with you on this. Relying on the government to stimulate the economy is relying on tbe government to stimulate the economy. Whether it's on defense spending, infrastructure, union jobs, teaching and education, college, energy, etc. You can make the argument that it will have a far reaching and compounding effect on the economy, in a multitude of ways.

I think decisions regarding military spending should be based on "maximizing value", as well as what is actually necessary to strengthen our standing/safety in the world . This whole argument about military spending being about the economy is bullshit, and sounds like a left wing nut job who thinks only the government can save us kind of argument.

(and yes of course military spending will have economic consequences, all spending will)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 03:13:58 PM
So fund the infrastructure plan by issuing more bonds, thus increasing our debt?
If that debt is to american citizens who were forced to bring their taxable wealth back here, it would a start.  I said it was a radical idea, but for now, until we balance the budget, it seems like a better idea.  Interest on the bonds could be taxable when they cash out I suppose.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 05, 2017, 03:16:07 PM
If that debt is to american citizens who were forced to bring their taxable wealth back here, it would a start.  I said it was a radical idea, but for now, until we balance the budget, it seems like a better idea.  Interest on the bonds could be taxable when they cash out I suppose.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



So you're saying that instead of re-investing their profits, they should lend the profits to the US government so that it can fund infrastructure projects? I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 03:19:39 PM
There's nothing wrong with your opinion on cutting the military in this post, it's a lot better than saying freak the military, like your last post.

For all the corporate loopholes, the US has the highest corporate tax rate in the industrialized world. It keeps foreign earned cash out of the country and significantly alters the economy in that respect. Make a deal and repatriate the cash and lower the corporate tax rate such that companies can profitably bring foreign earned money onshore. Then make it such that companies are not desperate to keep it in overseas banks. That will greatly improve our economy in the long run.

Lowering the corporate tax structure seems like a win for the big company but it actually will help the smaller ones as well. Besides, a well run small to midsize company can keep their profits to a minimum through legal means anyhow. Lowering the tax rate may behoove them to show a profit.
I never said freak the military Puck.  I have all the respect in the world for those who serve.  If we focus on the items I mentioned, we wouldn't necessarily need to cut down on boots.  I would certainly cut down on some overseas bases, and transition some boots to an increased national guard.  Would much rather have guys building houses, policing our streets, watching our borders, but still be ready to fight if need be.

On the rest I agree.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 05, 2017, 03:28:15 PM
If that debt is to american citizens who were forced to bring their taxable wealth back here, it would a start.  I said it was a radical idea, but for now, until we balance the budget, it seems like a better idea.  Interest on the bonds could be taxable when they cash out I suppose.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

I think you have this crabbed bro. There are plenty of tax shelters in the US. Look up the South Dakota Trust company, for instance. Yes, the Dakota's are a huge tax haven for wealthy families. Just rent a fake storefront in bumfuck South Dakota and bingo bammo, you have a tax shelter trust all ready to go.

Hardly any US citizens have offshore accounts to hide any longer. The days of the numbered Swiss account and bearer bonds are long over. There's reciprocation and such with financial info now. The big detriment to offshore tax cheating is, whistle blowers can get 20% plus for the back tax collected by the IRS. For instance, the guy that blew the whistle on UBS tax shelters (look it up) made upwards of 20-25 million dollars. I think the guy, a UBS Swiss banker, set them up, blew them up when the IRS came sniffing around, testified, went to jail for a little bit, and profited........( I may have the details a little messed up but it did happen almost like this)

 The government made offshore tax shelters highly illegal. I know from my days as an FA that people that got caught, had their multi million dollar accounts become single digit accounts, through the back tax and immense penalties and that's not taking into account the prison time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 03:28:59 PM
So you're saying that instead of re-investing their profits, they should lend the profits to the US government so that it can fund infrastructure projects? I'm not entirely sure what you're talking about.
I'm trying to find a middle ground.  Money stowed in the Caymans and Cyprus does us no good.  If we shut that down, I would like to provide a domestic tax shelter, which is why I said they could buy bonds pre tax up to a certain amount.  Its essentially forced investment into the US economy.  It wasn't like they were reinvesting those profits anyway.  They are currently hiding them offshore.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 03:33:37 PM
I think you have this crabbed bro. There are plenty of tax shelters in the US. Look up the South Dakota Trust company, for instance. Yes, the Dakota's are a huge tax haven for wealthy families. Just rent a fake storefront in bumfuck South Dakota and bingo bammo, you have a tax shelter trust all ready to go.

Hardly any US citizens have offshore accounts to hide any longer. The days of the numbered Swiss account and bearer bonds are long over. There's reciprocation and such with financial info now and whistle blowers can get 20% plus for the back tax collected by the IRS. For instance, the guy that blew the whistle on UBS tax shelters (look it up) made upwards of 20-25 million dollars.

 The government made offshore tax shelters highly illegal. I know from my days as an FA that people that got caught, had their multi million dollar accounts become single digit accounts, through the back tax and immense penalties and that's not taking into account the prison time.
You sound more knowledgeable than me on this, so I will take your word on it.  It's just that in the past election cycle, everyone from Bernie to Trump were talking about repatriation of money.  What am I missing?

Why not create an option better than illegally, or even dubiously, sheltering money?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 05, 2017, 03:35:36 PM
I'm trying to find a middle ground.  Money stowed in the Caymans and Cyprus does us no good.  If we shut that down, I would like to provide a domestic tax shelter, which is why I said they could buy bonds pre tax up to a certain amount.  Its essentially forced investment into the US economy.  It wasn't like they were reinvesting those profits anyway.  They are currently hiding them offshore.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



But companies already do that to a large extent. It's the job of a firm's CFO and Treasurers to find ways to re-invest cash they're sitting on, but usually short term investments. This includes equities (which directly benefits the U.S economy), strategic investments (which directly benefits the U.S economy), and sometimes short term low-yield bonds, but nothing risky. Forcing them to invest all their money in low yield U.S T-bills isn't something their shareholders would appreciate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 03:36:46 PM


I have to disagree with you on this. Relying on the government to stimulate the economy is relying on tbe government to stimulate the economy. Whether it's on defense spending, infrastructure, union jobs, teaching and education, college, energy, etc. You can make the argument that it will have a far reaching and compounding effect on the economy, in a multitude of ways.

I think decisions regarding military spending should be based on "maximizing value", as well as what is actually necessary to strengthen our standing/safety in the world . This whole argument about military spending being about the economy is bullshit, and sounds like a left wing nut job who thinks only the government can save us kind of argument.

(and yes of course military spending will have economic consequences, all spending will)

You are spot on, other than one massive error.

The military being about the economy and only the government can save you (from a military standpoint) is about as far from left wing as you can get.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 03:40:22 PM
But companies already do that to a large extent. It's the job of a firm's CFO and Treasurers to find ways to re-invest cash they're sitting on, but usually short term investments. This includes equities (which directly benefits the U.S economy), strategic investments (which directly benefits the U.S economy), and sometimes short term low-yield bonds, but nothing risky. Forcing them to invest all their money in low yield U.S T-bills isn't something their shareholders would appreciate.
I'm specifically talking about money they are not reinvesting and putting in shelters to avoid paying taxes.  Fine, don't pay taxes on it.  But keep it here so we can fix pur roads and bridges.  How is that not a win win?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 05, 2017, 03:46:18 PM
You sound more knowledgeable than me on this, so I will take your word on it.  It's just that in the past election cycle, everyone from Bernie to Trump were talking about repatriation of money.  What am I missing?

Why not create an option better than illegally, or even dubiously, sheltering money?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Oh my bad I know exactly what you're misunderstanding is you're confusing the individual/families and the corporation.

 Offshore tax havens and loopholes are now the territory of the corporation. A dollar earned offshore, kept offshore is taxed where the profit originated. If it's brought back onshore it's taxed at the much higher US rate. So it behooves the large mutlinationals or any multinational to keep their cash off shore.

The US (IRS) has really cracked down on individuals keeping their money offshore. They have even convinced the Swiss to abolish their centuries old policies of secrecy. A decade ago the large CPA firms tried to woo the wealthy with offshore tax shelter trusts. The IRS declared them illegal and walloped a ton of families with gigantic tax/penalty bills that destroyed most of it not all of the money they tried to shelter in the first place. It was a back and forth of immense law suits and such.

That's where the onshore tax shelters and tax havens grew legs. If you're a wealthy family all you have to do is rent a fake store front in South Dakota for a few bucks and you can start a tax shelter trust, GRITS/Grats etc. etc.

There are many articles proclaiming the US one of the biggest tax shelter countries in the world. Believe it or not we are one of if not the best places for wealthy individuals (families) everywhere to hide their money from the taxman.......weird but true.


If you're a huge hedge fund guy, then it gets way way more complex. A lot of them hide their money in Bermuda insurance companies, I am not really up on why. Suffice to say it's very beneficial tax wise. I think that falls under the corporate tax haven though.

Also hedge fund guys can designate their profits as Capital gains, lowering their effective tax bracket from 39.6 to 20% (it used to be 15).

So there's lots of stuff.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 05, 2017, 03:50:17 PM
Yeah, I had to use my social security number to open a bank account in HK. Back in the day it wasn't required, and people would work and just claim that they made nothing, thus pay no federal taxes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 05, 2017, 04:00:14 PM
You sound more knowledgeable than me on this, so I will take your word on it.  It's just that in the past election cycle, everyone from Bernie to Trump were talking about repatriation of money.  What am I missing?

Why not create an option better than illegally, or even dubiously, sheltering money?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk


I don't want to come off as an expert, I have been out of that side of the business for a long long time. I am sure there are many different techniques to shelter money from taxes that came after I left that side of finance. I was just going off of memory.

 However, I am pretty certain the days of US citizens keeping their money in a Swiss bank or the Caymans is for now, largely dead. There's too much risk and not enough reward. Of course, that doesn't preclude people that are downright stupid and like to push their luck.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 05, 2017, 04:01:53 PM
Yeah, I had to use my social security number to open a bank account in HK. Back in the day it wasn't required, and people would work and just claim that they made nothing, thus pay no federal taxes.

Yeah man I used to hide online poker winnings through Netteller, an offshore bank. God forbid if I tried that excrement now. I would be in the poor house with all the money I was making back then because of the penalties. At one time, I was able to directly deposit the winning into my brokerage account. lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 05, 2017, 04:04:35 PM
Yeah man I used to hide online poker winnings through Netteller, an offshore bank. God forbid if I tried that excrement now. I would be in the poor house with all the money I was making back then because of the penalties. At one time, I was able to directly deposit the winning into my brokerage account. lol

If anything the Chinese are the ones who hide their assets overseas, which is why they buy properties all over the world. They're just piggy banks for them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 05, 2017, 04:06:42 PM
If anything the Chinese are the ones who hide their assets overseas, which is why they buy properties all over the world. They're just piggy banks for them.

South Americans as well. Brazialians bid up Miami real estate like no tomorrow just a couple of years ago. They bought everything in site before their economy collapsed. Wealthy Venezuelans and Argentinians as well.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 04:07:58 PM
If it could be made reasonably less annoying, because all of this cloak and dagger excrement sounds exausting, wouldn't it just be easier to invest in US bonds pre tax?  Keep the money here, possibly stop selling bonds to foreign countries, build some roads, create some jobs.

I know it seems too simplistic, but I think it would be better than the current situation.

As a CEO, would you rather have an entire team of accountants trying to hide profits, or a couple of guys deciding how much to reinvest in the company, and how much to invest in the country, legally avoiding taxes.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 04:16:14 PM
If anything the Chinese are the ones who hide their assets overseas, which is why they buy properties all over the world. They're just piggy banks for them.
Man, and I may take some heat on this, but I would drop the hammer on non US citizens buying up our land.  You want to buy a vacation home, fine.  You want to rent it out, you are paying a hefty tax.  You want on office building in Manhattan?  Good luck with that.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 05, 2017, 04:16:31 PM
If it could be made reasonably less annoying, because all of this cloak and dagger excrement sounds exausting, wouldn't it just be easier to invest in US bonds pre tax?  Keep the money here, possibly stop selling bonds to foreign countries, build some roads, create some jobs.

I know it seems too simplistic, but I think it would be better than the current situation.

As a CEO, would you rather have an entire team of accountants trying to hide profits, or a couple of guys deciding how much to reinvest in the company, and how much to invest in the country, legally avoiding taxes.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



U.S bonds have very low yields, so even if they don't become taxable, I highly doubt it'll increase the percentage of a company's portfolio is allocated to them. And I don't know what you mean buy "selling to foreign governments". We don't have control over who buys bonds - they're traded on the open market. And the vast majority of holders of U.S debt are U.S investors. Foreign governments make up a fraction. Besides, why does it matter who's buying the bonds?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 05, 2017, 04:17:30 PM
Man, and I may take some heat on this, but I would drop the hammer on non US citizens buying up our land.  You want to buy a vacation home, fine.  You want to rent it out, you are paying a hefty tax.  You want on office building in Manhattan?  Good luck with that.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



They don't want to rent it out most of the time. They don't are. They buy property just to park their money.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 05, 2017, 04:20:05 PM
I'll fix this debt.  I'll call China and see if I can put $20 on it.  That oughta buy us some time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 05, 2017, 04:35:26 PM
They don't want to rent it out most of the time. They don't are. They buy property just to park their money.

We have massive issues with that in Vancouver and to a lesser extent Toronto. Vancouver recently enacted a 15% Foreign Buyer tax on all residential property sales despite the real estate industry swearing blind that foreign investors were a tiny part of what was forcing prices to skyrocket, and whaddyaknow? Housing prices suddenly stabilised and then reversed a little.

Now we're going through the same thing in Toronto with the housing market spinning wildly out of control, and the real estate associations telling us that the problem is not foreign speculators but building regulation. Which, of course, begs the question: if there's no issue with foreign speculation, what's their issue with a foreign buyer's tax? Personally I'd implement not just a tax on foreign buyers, but also on vacant properties regardless of who owns them. Right now we have Chinese students buying houses for $2M+ despite no declared income.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 05, 2017, 04:42:08 PM
They don't want to rent it out most of the time. They don't are. They buy property just to park their money.

This.....

Most of the rental properties are being gobbled up by hedge funds, two totally different buyers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 04:47:53 PM
U.S bonds have very low yields, so even if they don't become taxable, I highly doubt it'll increase the percentage of a company's portfolio is allocated to them. And I don't know what you mean buy "selling to foreign governments". We don't have control over who buys bonds - they're traded on the open market. And the vast majority of holders of U.S debt are U.S investors. Foreign governments make up a fraction. Besides, why does it matter who's buying the bonds?
Low yields are better then little to no yields.  Take the money out of the shadows.

Remember, I am implementing a rule change here.  They can stow this money like a short term version of a 401k.  In this case they are investing in the US, and the return is a guarenteed %, completely safe.

My long term goal would prohibit non US citizens or companies from buying bonds at all.  Now that I think of it, every US citizen should be able to buy bonds pre tax.  It would be a nice alternative to 401k, which depends solely on the stock market.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on April 05, 2017, 04:48:56 PM
Low yields are better then little to no yields.  Take the money out of the shadows.

Remember, I am implementing a rule change here.  They can stow this money like a short term version of a 401k.  In this case they are investing in the US, and the return is a guarenteed %, completely safe.

My long term goal would prohibit non US citizens or companies from buying bonds at all.  Now that I think of it, every US citizen should be able to buy bonds pre tax.  It would be a nice alternative to 401k, which depends solely on the stock market.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



That is just about the stupidest idea I've ever heard, lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 04:51:04 PM
This.....

Most of the rental properties are being gobbled up by hedge funds, two totally different buyers.
JE nailed it.  Tax the ever loving excrement out of foreign investors trying to do this.

A vacant building in any major city drives up rental prices for everyone else.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 04:53:02 PM
That is just about the stupidest idea I've ever heard, lmao
OK fucknuts, care to contribute to the conversation, or did you just need to pull an inane comment out of your derriere?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 05, 2017, 04:55:20 PM
Low yields are better then little to no yields.  Take the money out of the shadows.

Remember, I am implementing a rule change here.  They can stow this money like a short term version of a 401k.  In this case they are investing in the US, and the return is a guarenteed %, completely safe.

My long term goal would prohibit non US citizens or companies from buying bonds at all.  Now that I think of it, every US citizen should be able to buy bonds pre tax.  It would be a nice alternative to 401k, which depends solely on the stock market.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Now if they're using this as a short term 401k,won't the United States just need to borrow that money from elsewhere and pay them issues to make up for the inability funds? I don't see this as a solution
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on April 05, 2017, 04:57:41 PM
That is just about the stupidest idea I've ever heard, lmao

Just to elaborate, if you prevent foreigners from buying US bonds you're basically taking away a major source of financing for our current debt (considering the ridiculously low yield on bonds rn, foreigners who buy our bonds are basically giving us a free loan). A lot of Americans wouldn't want to invest in our bonds precisely because the return is so low as well and are gonna invest overseas in riskier countries but ones where they could see a possible return, especially if they have no need/requirement to invest in bonds otherwise
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 05:03:12 PM
Now if they're using this as a short term 401k,won't the United States just need to borrow that money from elsewhere and pay them issues to make up for the inability funds? I don't see this as a solution
I am going on the assumption they would be parking their money there for more than five years at a time.  I am also going on the assumption that we balance the damn budget at some point.  Since they are low yield, its not going to break the bank when they pull out, and a certain estimation of pulling out would be worked into the budget.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 05, 2017, 05:07:18 PM
Just to elaborate, if you prevent foreigners from buying US bonds you're basically taking away a major source of financing for our current debt (considering the ridiculously low yield on bonds rn, foreigners who buy our bonds are basically giving us a free loan). A lot of Americans wouldn't want to invest in our bonds precisely because the return is so low as well and are gonna invest overseas in riskier countries but ones where they could see a possible return, especially if they have no need/requirement to invest in bonds otherwise
If you bothered to follow along, I am talking about a very specific subset of monies.

Money that is being hidden in shelters does nothing but ease the tax burden on those trying to shelter that money.  If anything, they are losing money there as well because it is stagnant.  Why not incentivise them to bring the money home and make a small profit on it?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 05, 2017, 08:23:15 PM
But it's not just cutting staff (military personnel), it's the hundreds of defense contractors and sub-contractors that employ millions of people and rely on defense spending. You can't say the same about the Parks Department, etc. Cutting defense spending in half would be a massive blow to that industry, and those people, including the military personnel, would flood the labor market, and most will have to rely on unemployment insurance and Medicare. That'll only drive mandatory spending way up, forcing more cuts.

Nah dude, the free market will fix it. They can all become Uber drivers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 05, 2017, 08:28:31 PM
Nah dude, the free market will fix it. They can all become Uber drivers.

No but see the problem is that all the Uber and Starbucks jobs are taken already by the gazillion people who did History of Art and Media Studies degrees.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 05, 2017, 08:57:28 PM
No but see the problem is that all the Uber and Starbucks jobs are taken already by the gazillion people who did History of Art and Media Studies degrees.

But if these people could escape their student debt, they could finally follow their dreams of becoming professional paid protesters.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 06, 2017, 11:20:42 AM
http://wapo.st/2oKmgja
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 08, 2017, 03:30:02 PM
Hope you guys like taxes, New York just became the first state to offer free public college
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 08, 2017, 03:38:36 PM
Hope you guys like taxes, New York just became the first state to offer free public college
Hope you like them too.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 08, 2017, 03:41:36 PM
Hope you like them too.

That's why I'll be joining every other sane person and getting the freak out of New York. Shits just not affordable
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on April 08, 2017, 03:44:41 PM
That's why I'll be joining every other sane person and getting the freak out of New York. Shits just not affordable
just move to jersey.


avoid the buffalo wild wings doe.

Sent from my SM-G920W8 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 08, 2017, 03:45:04 PM
That's why I'll be joining every other sane person and getting the freak out of New York. Shits just not affordable
You live out in the sticks, move to one of the three desirable boroughs then you can talk to me about affordable.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 08, 2017, 03:47:44 PM
You live out in the sticks, move to one of the three desirable boroughs then you can talk to me about affordable.

Long Island isn't cheap like upstate but I'm sure the city is more. Regardless this states freaking retarded with how expensive everything is, and it just keeps increasing
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 08, 2017, 04:10:51 PM
Long Island isn't cheap like upstate but I'm sure the city is more. Regardless this states freaking retarded with how expensive everything is, and it just keeps increasing
Its expensive to live within an hour of NYC, LA, or San Fran.  Shocking.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 08, 2017, 07:53:27 PM
I don't mind it as long as the scholarship requirements are strict.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 08, 2017, 08:10:35 PM
I don't mind it as long as the scholarship requirements are strict.

Parents make less than 125,000$ per year is the requirements, and must work in NY for however many years you went to school for after you graduate.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 08, 2017, 10:25:22 PM
Parents make less than 125,000$ per year is the requirements, and must work in NY for however many years you went to school for after you graduate.

I meant academic. I don't want my taxes being used for retards to go to college. It they're gifted but poor, the sure.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 08, 2017, 10:57:21 PM
I meant academic. I don't want my taxes being used for retards to go to college. It they're gifted but poor, the sure.

I know, but there is none.

Anybody qualifies

I think you just need to have above a 2.0 GPA or something stupid to keep it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 08, 2017, 11:52:14 PM
Have SUNY prices gone up all that much?  I was easily able to work my way through as a NY resident.  Minimum wage, part time.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on April 09, 2017, 07:02:43 AM
Its expensive to live within an hour of NYC, LA, or San Fran.  Shocking.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Sadly for me you can stretch that.out to closer to 2 for NYC.

Have SUNY prices gone up all that much?  I was easily able to work my way through as a NY resident.  Minimum wage, part time.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Prices have gone up and minimum wage has been failing to keep up with inflation since before your time so that situation just keeps getting worse. Anyone who worked through college and graduated debt free was either a machine who never slept more than 3 hours a night or was fortunate to live within driving distance of a school with affordable tuition.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 09, 2017, 08:51:11 AM
I know, but there is none.

Anybody qualifies

I think you just need to have above a 2.0 GPA or something stupid to keep it

Contradicting yourself in the same post, nice.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 09, 2017, 01:14:04 PM
Contradicting yourself in the same post, nice.

There's none to qualify.

But there is to maintain it for future semesters.

Two separate things. And I'd hardly call a 2.0 standards
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 10, 2017, 09:18:11 PM
There's none to qualify.

But there is to maintain it for future semesters.

Two separate things. And I'd hardly call a 2.0 standards

They have to get into the school first.

And you can bet competition is going to increase at SUNY and CUNY now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 10, 2017, 09:42:54 PM
They have to get into the school first.

And you can bet competition is going to increase at SUNY and CUNY now.

I'd also bet they try to expand their capacity and standards drop to take advantage of the situation
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 10, 2017, 10:20:13 PM
I'd also bet they try to expand their capacity and standards drop to take advantage of the situation

So more people will earn degrees without incurring crippling debt? They should make you the spokesman for this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 11, 2017, 12:16:39 AM
I'd also bet they try to expand their capacity and standards drop to take advantage of the situation
I just can't anymore.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on April 11, 2017, 04:41:01 AM
That's why I'll be joining every other sane person and getting the freak out of New York. Shits just not affordable
Excellent idea.  In fact leave YESTERDAY!

A terrific first step in Making NY Great again!



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 11, 2017, 05:17:02 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/04/11/world/middleeast/document-Syria-Chemical-Weapons-Report-White-House.html

Intelligence refutes claims that the chemical attack wasn't initiated by Assad, point-by-point.  I read it, and it does look awful obvious it was Assad and the Russians are covering up everything they do.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 11, 2017, 06:11:41 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/04/11/world/middleeast/document-Syria-Chemical-Weapons-Report-White-House.html

Intelligence refutes claims that the chemical attack wasn't initiated by Assad, point-by-point.  I read it, and it does look awful obvious it was Assad and the Russians are covering up everything they do.

Have we gotten to the point where people will just assume Russia is responsible for everything?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 11, 2017, 06:17:19 PM
Have we gotten to the point where people will just assume Russia is responsible for everything?

dcm is moving to Russia so he doesn't have to pay taxes that will go to NY college students.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 11, 2017, 06:23:08 PM
dcm is moving to Russia so he doesn't have to pay taxes that will go to NY college students.

From a business and economic standpoint I'm not sure how free tuition for state and city colleges will work. Either schools will get overcrowded and the student to teacher ratio rises significantly, or they increase admission standards. But if they do that, they will have to justify it by providing top professors and facilities. Those don't come cheap. Should just give out more academic based grants.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 11, 2017, 06:25:05 PM
From a business and economic standpoint I'm not sure how free tuition for state and city colleges will work. Either schools will get overcrowded and the student to teacher ratio rises significantly, or they increase admission standards. But if they do that, they will have to justify it by providing top professors and facilities. Those don't come cheap. Should just give out more academic based grants.

It's New York, they'll just raise taxes and not give a excrement. There's a reason why we have the highest tax burden in the country
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 11, 2017, 06:31:51 PM
From a business and economic standpoint I'm not sure how free tuition for state and city colleges will work. Either schools will get overcrowded and the student to teacher ratio rises significantly, or they increase admission standards. But if they do that, they will have to justify it by providing top professors and facilities. Those don't come cheap. Should just give out more academic based grants.

Why do people think giving a tuition break to people under a certain income will mean everyone gets into the school now?

Admission standards increase by default by the new applicant pool being larger. The school doesn't have to raise them. They'll have better students to pick from.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on April 11, 2017, 06:40:55 PM
It already wasn't that easy to get into a suny. Hell, last time I checked orange county community college even had high school gpa and course pre requisites to get into any decent associates degree program.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 11, 2017, 06:43:41 PM
Why do people think giving a tuition break to people under a certain income will mean everyone gets into the school now?

Admission standards increase by default by the new applicant pool being larger. The school doesn't have to raise them. They'll have better students to pick from.

Yeah but you're just artificially making it tougher to get into. It won't be because the programs, facilities, or professors will be better.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 11, 2017, 06:48:38 PM
Yeah but you're just artificially making it tougher to get into. It won't be because the programs, facilities, or professors will be better.

I don't think this matters. So what?

The bigger issue will be that this is a massive entitlement for the highest tax state in the country which has already become difficult for many people to afford.

And college graduates already can't get jobs, so I'm not sure how this is going to generate a return on investment (it won't)

Hopefully there's at least some sort of stipulation forcing the schools to enlist a certain percentage of students who will have useful degrees and actually contribute to society

The other potential issue, is this will make state schools exponentially make difficult to get in. So won't this program make it more difficult for the underprivileged to get into, thus forcing them to go to private schools or out of state screwing them? Because presumably since they're underprivileged they'll lack the resources to be as competitive as others (or so the left tells us), making it all the harder. Not sure how that will play out
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 12, 2017, 12:39:32 AM
From a business and economic standpoint I'm not sure how free tuition for state and city colleges will work. Either schools will get overcrowded and the student to teacher ratio rises significantly, or they increase admission standards. But if they do that, they will have to justify it by providing top professors and facilities. Those don't come cheap. Should just give out more academic based grants.
You are assuming that SUNY accepts everyone.  They don't.  Why in the hell would they care where the money comes from when they are already turning people away?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 12, 2017, 12:46:05 AM
I don't think this matters. So what?

The bigger issue will be that this is a massive entitlement for the highest tax state in the country which has already become difficult for many people to afford.

And college graduates already can't get jobs, so I'm not sure how this is going to generate a return on investment (it won't)

Hopefully there's at least some sort of stipulation forcing the schools to enlist a certain percentage of students who will have useful degrees and actually contribute to society

The other potential issue, is this will make state schools exponentially make difficult to get in. So won't this program make it more difficult for the underprivileged to get into, thus forcing them to go to private schools or out of state screwing them? Because presumably since they're underprivileged they'll lack the resources to be as competitive as others (or so the left tells us), making it all the harder. Not sure how that will play out
You should probably just choke on your own tongue for about 10 years.  I applaud the effort, but you kill brain cells with every post.

Research, like anything.  Learn something.  Maybe then you can sit at the adult table.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 12, 2017, 11:07:30 AM
You should probably just choke on your own tongue for about 10 years.  I applaud the effort, but you kill brain cells with every post.

Research, like anything.  Learn something.  Maybe then you can sit at the adult table.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Please explain

Spending hundreds of millions won't raise taxes?

Raising admission standards won't make it harder for lesser privileged people to get in?

And complaining about people either worthless degrees will always be an issue with expensive education.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 12, 2017, 11:15:09 AM
Please explain

Spending hundreds of millions won't raise taxes?

Raising admission standards won't make it harder for lesser privileged people to get in?

And complaining about people either worthless degrees will always be an issue with expensive education.

Haven't you been reading Fen's posts? All we have to do is cut defense spending in half. Problem solved!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 12, 2017, 11:20:01 AM
Haven't you been reading Fen's posts? All we have to do is cut defense spending in half. Problem solved!

No it's. FACT if we cut defense spending it would guarantee world peace and save the whales.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 18, 2017, 03:08:01 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/04/18/new-details-emerge-in-theft-ga-voting-machines.html

Quote
Key electronic voter logs used in the Georgia special election to fill a vacant Congressional seat were swiped from the pickup truck of a poll worker during a grocery run, according to a police report obtained by Fox News.

Bahaha.  "Honey I'm gon run by the Quik Pik to get some PBR and Doritos.  I'm gon drop off dem gat dayum voter machine doohickeys later."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 20, 2017, 03:26:58 PM
The latest exxon mobile request to bypass sanctions and make Putin billions...

I'm not sure how much more needs to be said.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 20, 2017, 04:55:14 PM
"I really am amazed that a judge sitting on an island in the Pacific can issue an order that stops the president."

I really am amazed we allowed someone from Alabama to be in charge of something larger than a Dairy Queen.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 20, 2017, 04:56:03 PM
"I really am amazed that a judge sitting on an island in the Pacific can issue an order that stops the president."

I really am amazed we allowed someone from Alabama to be in charge of something larger than a Dairy Queen.

Both things can be true.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 20, 2017, 05:35:55 PM
"I really am amazed that a judge sitting on an island in the Pacific can issue an order that stops the president."

I really am amazed we allowed someone from Alabama to be in charge of something larger than a Dairy Queen.

So, uh, is Hawaii somehow less of a state? "Yes, you can be part of America but only so we can come and enjoy your beaches and park our aircraft carriers there without having to go to the trouble of getting a passport. Don't for one moment kid yourself that you're as important as us."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 21, 2017, 10:31:03 AM
Dow Chemical has basically said, "Look, we stuffed the Trump campaign with a million dollars, now make science that hurts our business go away."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 21, 2017, 11:21:23 AM
Dow Chemical has basically said, "Look, we stuffed the Trump campaign with a million dollars, now make science that hurts our business go away."
Dow Chemical is the 50th state.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 21, 2017, 11:46:57 AM
Dow Chemical is the 50th state.

I'd trade South Dakota for it (who the freak needs TWO Dakotas?) but I'm keeping Hawaii.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 21, 2017, 12:03:20 PM
Dow Chemical is the 50th state.

The Chairman of Dow Chemical wouldn't overrule an executive order, so in many ways they're more of a state than Hawaii.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 21, 2017, 12:04:30 PM
I'd trade South Dakota for it (who the freak needs TWO Dakotas?) but I'm keeping Hawaii.

Nah brah, South Dakota's the good one, it's got Mount Rushhmore. North Dakota's the one you ditch.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 21, 2017, 12:15:46 PM
Nah brah, South Dakota's the good one, it's got Mount Rushhmore. North Dakota's the one you ditch.

I was just figuring merge them into a single state of: "Bumblefuck Nowhere" and be done with it. But if Canada wants to annex the northern one, by all means, take that excrement. Hell, I'll even throw in Montana.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 21, 2017, 12:20:08 PM
I was just figuring merge them into a single state of: "Bumblefuck Nowhere" and be done with it. But if Canada wants to annex the northern one, by all means, take that excrement. Hell, I'll even throw in Montana.

We'll take it if you want - we'll never say no to good farmland and oil reserves - but you're going to have to disarm the residents first. We're not sending in the Mounties to take guns off a bunch of American ranchers and cowboys, and we're not letting them keep their firearms because then Alberta will go getting ideas. Maybe you can mollify them by telling them about the free healthcare and non-lunatic politicans they'll be getting?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 21, 2017, 12:52:13 PM
We'll take it if you want - we'll never say no to good farmland and oil reserves - but you're going to have to disarm the residents first. We're not sending in the Mounties to take guns off a bunch of American ranchers and cowboys, and we're not letting them keep their firearms because then Alberta will go getting ideas. Maybe you can mollify them by telling them about the free healthcare and non-lunatic politicans they'll be getting?

Oh no, you want them, you take them as-is. All sales final.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 21, 2017, 12:54:08 PM
Oh no, you want them, you take them as-is. All sales final.

freak no, no deal then. We're not just letting a bunch of gun happy Americans become part of our country unless they're willing to assimilate with our laws and cultural norms. We'll stick with our refugees, thanks. They're far less scary.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 21, 2017, 01:16:37 PM
freak no, no deal then. We're not just letting a bunch of gun happy Americans become part of our country unless they're willing to assimilate with our laws and cultural norms. We'll stick with our refugees, thanks. They're far less scary.

I think you guys can handle the 15 people that live in North Dakota and Montana.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 21, 2017, 01:30:26 PM
Montana and the Dakotas are beautiful places that I'd like to see some day.  Maybe when the kids get a little older I can take a good week or so and travel through there.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 21, 2017, 01:43:42 PM
freak no, no deal then. We're not just letting a bunch of gun happy Americans become part of our country unless they're willing to assimilate with our laws and cultural norms. We'll stick with our refugees, thanks. They're far less scary.

This is why guys like Trump get elected. #thanksobama
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 21, 2017, 01:47:06 PM
freak that, I'm keeping Montana.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 21, 2017, 02:04:38 PM
Montana and the Dakotas are beautiful places that I'd like to see some day.  Maybe when the kids get a little older I can take a good week or so and travel through there.
Do a Grand Teton/Yellowstone trip across WY/MT. Skip the Dakotas.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on April 21, 2017, 02:08:10 PM
South Dakota is nice, the black hills area.  North Dakota is a dump.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 21, 2017, 02:35:30 PM
South Dakota is nice, the black hills area.  North Dakota is a dump.

North Dakota, or as Canadians would rename it, Florida.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on April 21, 2017, 02:47:42 PM
North Dakota, or as Canadians would rename it, Florida.

Actually...we call it American Manitoba
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 21, 2017, 02:59:32 PM
Actually...we call it American Manitoba

North Dakota, Manitoba's poopchute. What MB puts in its mouth today comes out of ND tomorrow.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on April 22, 2017, 03:54:48 AM
One Carolina and one Dakota.

Excellent idea

Back to the Great Old Forty Eight AND

FOUR fewer crooked GOP grafting Nazis in the US Senate

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 25, 2017, 06:55:40 PM
"The Hill — Former President Barack Obama has agreed to speak at a Wall Street conference for $400,000, according to a new report.

The former president’s reported speaking fee is nearly twice the price commanded by Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 25, 2017, 07:18:41 PM
that's always been a perk of being an ex President, speeches and speaking tour commands ridiculous money.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on April 25, 2017, 07:22:49 PM
that's always been a perk of being an ex President, speeches and speaking tour commands ridiculous money.

its probably how they wash all the under the table money lol. pass this and then in a few years come to our "speaking engagement" for  1 mil per hour lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on April 25, 2017, 07:24:18 PM
"The Hill — Former President Barack Obama has agreed to speak at a Wall Street conference for $400,000, according to a new report.

The former president’s reported speaking fee is nearly twice the price commanded by Hillary Clinton, the 2016 Democratic presidential nominee."

what are they trying to say here? are they trying to drum up outrage vs obama since hillary got a lot of criticism for being paid well to speak to wall street too?

the difference is that hillary was actively running for a campaign to be the lead executive of this country at the time she was paid those amounts to speak to wall street, and obama is a former president who isn't doing anything else. not comparable, no point in that last sentence whatsoever but they bring it up anyways
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 25, 2017, 07:28:32 PM
If an IB wanted to lure institutions to one of their events or conferences, I can understand paying Obama that much. But I'll still never understand how Hillary got so much.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 25, 2017, 07:30:52 PM
what are they trying to say here? are they trying to drum up outrage vs obama since hillary got a lot of criticism for being paid well to speak to wall street too?

the difference is that hillary was actively running for a campaign to be the lead executive of this country at the time she was paid those amounts to speak to wall street, and obama is a former president who isn't doing anything else. not comparable, no point in that last sentence whatsoever but they bring it up anyways

Believe me, people who attend these conferences aren't interested in the slightest about what either actually says. They're basically just a name to get people to show up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 26, 2017, 12:55:33 PM
Believe me, people who attend these conferences aren't interested in the slightest about what either actually says. They're basically just a name to get people to show up.

Exactly, and it answers your question about why Hillary could get so much to speak. She's a former First Lady, Senator, and Sec. of State. Like her or not, that's a more impressive resume than most people will ever have.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 26, 2017, 03:16:36 PM
Exactly, and it answers your question about why Hillary could get so much to speak. She's a former First Lady, Senator, and Sec. of State. Like her or not, that's a more impressive resume than most people will ever have.

I can dig it, she's getting paid more than me because she's fucked way more interesting people than me. I can't argue with that logic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 26, 2017, 03:18:40 PM
I can dig it, she's getting paid more than me because she's fucked way more interesting people than me. I can't argue with that logic.

Well, you both freak guys, so.......Well, maybe she doesn't.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 26, 2017, 09:49:55 PM
Exactly, and it answers your question about why Hillary could get so much to speak. She's a former First Lady, Senator, and Sec. of State. Like her or not, that's a more impressive resume than most people will ever have.

Yeah but she's an uninteresting horrible human being so I would not pay anything to hear her talk. I would pay money to avoid going to one of her speeches
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 27, 2017, 08:50:25 AM
Yeah but she's an uninteresting horrible human being so I would not pay anything to hear her talk. I would pay money to avoid going to one of her speeches

You understand that the blue is completely your subjective opinion, and the red is certainly your prerogative, right?

Neither means she wouldn't be a good "get" as a guest speaker. I've sat through many a speech where I didn't like the speaker. That doesn't mean others in attendance felt the same.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 27, 2017, 08:52:59 AM
A few years ago, at our annual Global Conference attended by a few thousand staff, partners and major customers, the speaker that we had hired to talk about future markets spent at least half of his hour long spot eulogising the Koch Brothers and everything that they have achieved. There were some pretty uncomfortable people in that room.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 27, 2017, 08:54:15 AM
You understand that the blue is completely your subjective opinion, and the red is certainly your prerogative, right?

Neither means she wouldn't be a good "get" as a guest speaker. I've sat through many a speech where I didn't like the speaker. That doesn't mean others in attendance felt the same.

Lol guest speaker, I love that term. I frequently have house guests that are paid $1 million an hour to talk excrement to me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 27, 2017, 08:55:04 AM
A few years ago, at our annual Global Conference attended by a few thousand staff, partners and major customers, the speaker that we had hired to talk about future markets spent at least half of his hour long spot eulogising the Koch Brothers and everything that they have achieved. There were some pretty uncomfortable people in that room.

Did Herr Speaker goose step up to the podium?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 27, 2017, 08:56:51 AM
On a different note, Trump is going to give a big tax break to the nation's richest. freak the rest of us as well as the national debt.

Also, the FCC is going to gut Net Neutrality. This nonsense that it will create competition would be laughable if it weren't so awful. All it's going to do is cost jobs when smaller startups can't get an even footing on the carrier pipes while the biggest content producers pay more (and pass the costs to the consumer) to push their traffic.

Oh, and for good measure, Trump is trying to get national monument designations removed from things like sequoia trees.

Has anyone heard the results of the briefing the White House gave Senators yesterday regarding North Korea?

freak everything about this administration.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 27, 2017, 08:58:52 AM
Lol guest speaker, I love that term. I frequently have house guests that are paid $1 million an hour to talk excrement to me.

Honestly, I can't think of any speaker I've sat through that I honestly felt was worth the time spent, but I've come out of speeches where people were raving about it. So it certainly caters to some people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2017, 09:24:02 AM
On a different note, Trump is going to give a big tax break to the nation's richest. freak the rest of us as well as the national debt.

Also, the FCC is going to gut Net Neutrality. This nonsense that it will create competition would be laughable if it weren't so awful. All it's going to do is cost jobs when smaller startups can't get an even footing on the carrier pipes while the biggest content producers pay more (and pass the costs to the consumer) to push their traffic.

Oh, and for good measure, Trump is trying to get national monument designations removed from things like sequoia trees.

Has anyone heard the results of the briefing the White House gave Senators yesterday regarding North Korea?

freak everything about this administration.
You don't like that he wants to remove all deductions other than charity and, gasp, motgage interest?  A real estate mogul wants to cut corporate interest rates to 15% and keep the deduction for mortgage interest.

We are literally being punked at this point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2017, 09:49:28 AM
You don't like that he wants to remove all deductions other than charity and, gasp, motgage interest?  A real estate mogul wants to cut corporate interest rates to 15% and keep the deduction for mortgage interest.

We are literally being punked at this point.

Speaking as someone who itemizes the excrement out of his taxes and uses every loophole imaginable to get back as much as possible, I like the flat tax and no deduction idea if it means less money being taken out of my paycheck each pay period. Have you ever seen how much money the IRS pays back in refunds? It's staggering. Keep the tax code simple. This will also mean an end to H&R block.

And how is being able to deduct child credits and mortgage interest a bad thing? Just because it may benefit Trump's family it doesn't mean millions won't benefit as well. I don't understand the outrage when a President proposes something that he, as an American, may also benefit from. Also, I don't see how this tax plan helps the rich since they're the ones who itemize more than anyone.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on April 27, 2017, 09:50:54 AM
Yeah but she's an uninteresting horrible human being so I would not pay anything to hear her talk. I would pay money to avoid going to one of her speeches
You just described the Orange Jacka$$ to a tee

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on April 27, 2017, 09:53:26 AM
A few years ago, at our annual Global Conference attended by a few thousand staff, partners and major customers, the speaker that we had hired to talk about future markets spent at least half of his hour long spot eulogising the Koch Brothers and everything that they have achieved. There were some pretty uncomfortable people in that room.
Eulogizing would have been sensational in that it would have meant those disgusting Nazi pigs were dead

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 27, 2017, 09:55:05 AM
Eulogizing would have been sensational in that it would have meant those disgusting Nazi pigs were dead

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



Eulogy is not exclusive to death.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2017, 09:59:22 AM
Speaking as someone who itemizes the excrement out of his taxes and uses every loophole imaginable to get back as much as possible, I like the flat tax and no deduction idea if it means less money being taken out of my paycheck each pay period. Have you ever seen how much money the IRS pays back in refunds? It's staggering. Keep the tax code simple. This will also mean an end to H&R block.

And how is being able to deduct child credits and mortgage interest a bad thing? Just because it may benefit Trump's family it doesn't mean millions won't benefit as well. I don't understand the outrage when a President proposes something that he, as an American, may also benefit from. Also, I don't see how this tax plan helps the rich since they're the ones who itemize more than anyone.
You do understand he is derriere-raping normal people in blue states with high state taxes, right?

You do understand that he would have paid exactly $0 in 2005 if this plan would have been in place, right?

Your loopholes will be gone as an average single guy that is renting.  Would you like some lube?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on April 27, 2017, 10:10:15 AM
Eulogy is not exclusive to death.

You are correct but the current usage is just about exclusively about praising and memorializing the departed at least here in the lower 48

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 27, 2017, 10:13:10 AM
The only tax bracket that will have its percentage reduced is the top one. From 39.6% to 35%.

But how does his tax plan disproportionately help the rich?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2017, 10:17:54 AM
You do understand he is derriere-raping normal people in blue states with high state taxes, right?

You do understand that he would have paid exactly $0 in 2005 if this plan would have been in place, right?

Your loopholes will be gone as an average single guy that is renting.  Would you like some lube?

I'm trying to find the actual plan outlined, not just some blogger or writer's interpretation of it. Do you have a link? Having trouble finding it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2017, 10:20:44 AM
The only tax bracket that will have its percentage reduced is the top one. From 39.6% to 35%.

But how does his tax plan disproportionately help the rich?
People in that tax bracket were never paying 39.6, unless they were functionally retarded.

The new tax plan will ask the middle class to pay ALL of the taxes.  The 35% bracket will pay 0%, at the very least due to the LLC clause, which brings them down to 15%, buy a property or two, 0%.

As always, the devil is in the details.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2017, 10:21:58 AM
The only tax bracket that will have its percentage reduced is the top one. From 39.6% to 35%.

But how does his tax plan disproportionately help the rich?

From what I've read, it's going to be 10% 25% and 35%. The first $24k will be tax-free. Currently people pay 10% up to $10k then 15% up to $37k.

I don't know what the income level for each tax bracket will be yet. Does anyone have that info?

Would be good to have the details before we all rush to judgement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2017, 10:24:36 AM
People in that tax bracket were never paying 39.6, unless they were functionally retarded.

The new tax plan will ask the middle class to pay ALL of the taxes.  The 35% bracket will pay 0%, at the very least due to the LLC clause, which brings them down to 15%, buy a property or two, 0%.

As always, the devil is in the details.

Where are you getting these details? That's what I asked for. All of a sudden everyone is an accountant.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 27, 2017, 10:25:06 AM
I'm trying to find the actual plan outlined, not just some blogger or writer's interpretation of it. Do you have a link? Having trouble finding it.

Here's what's available: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/full-text-of-trump-administration-tax-reform-principles-2017-04-26 (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/full-text-of-trump-administration-tax-reform-principles-2017-04-26)

So I'll slightly walk back what I said about the only bracket being changed is the top one. Still, it overwhelmingly helps the top more than anyone else.

Quote
Tax relief for American families, especially middle-income families:
Reducing the 7 tax brackets to 3 tax brackets of 10%, 25% and 35%
Doubling the standard deduction
Providing tax relief for families with child and dependent care expenses

Simplification:
Eliminate targeted tax breaks that mainly benefit the wealthiest taxpayers
Protect the home ownership and charitable gift tax deductions
Repeal the Alternative Minimum Tax
Repeal the death tax
Repeal the 3.8% Obamacare tax that hits small businesses and investment income

Business Reform
15% business tax rate
Territorial tax system to level the playing field for American companies
One-time tax on trillions of dollars held overseas
Eliminate tax breaks for special interests
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2017, 10:25:19 AM


I'm trying to find the actual plan outlined, not just some blogger or writer's interpretation of it. Do you have a link? Having trouble finding it.

Just google it.  I watched financial wonks from across the political spectrum.  Even the trickle down believers think its derriere rape for the middle class.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2017, 10:33:28 AM
From what I've read, it's going to be 10% 25% and 35%. The first $24k will be tax-free. Currently people pay 10% up to $10k then 15% up to $37k.

I don't know what the income level for each tax bracket will be yet. Does anyone have that info?

Would be good to have the details before we all rush to judgement.
Yes.  Poverty level folks get a break in taxes, which is actually a good thing.  My fear is that the republicans will gut welfare to pay for it eventually.

The vast majority of us will be in the 25% bracket.  If you don't own a home, that's pretty much it.  I don't really have a problem with that.  If going LLC for my wife wasn't ludicrously expensive, I could get her to 15%.

For the rich, they wipe their asses with the LLC expenses.  Any of them with a decent accountant will go from 35 to 15% and write that off in mortgage interest.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2017, 10:39:49 AM
Here's what's available: http://www.marketwatch.com/story/full-text-of-trump-administration-tax-reform-principles-2017-04-26 (http://www.marketwatch.com/story/full-text-of-trump-administration-tax-reform-principles-2017-04-26)

So I'll slightly walk back what I said about the only bracket being changed is the top one. Still, it overwhelmingly helps the top more than anyone else.


Okay, so people earning less than $30k pay virtually no taxes under the new plan, and can still claim child care credits and mortgage interest. Also the standard deduction is doubled, so that helps those who earn around $40k or $50k with families. They'll likely end up paying nearly nothing in taxes as well.

The tax rate for the rich goes down to 35%, but the deductions and loopholes they've all been using up until now will be removed. Those are the same deductions that people complain about when spouting the "rich people don't pay taxes" nonsense. So I don't see how you can say that the rich are benefiting from this at a disproportionate level. Right now someone making $1mm a year has a tax rate of 39% but with all the deductions, they can easily get their effective tax rate down to 15%. I don't have all the details, but I can't see any way without those deductions how that would be possible under this new plan.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2017, 10:40:16 AM
Basically, create Tommy Spicer LLC, have your paycheck sent there, and you will only pay 15%.  You're welcome.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2017, 10:40:54 AM

Just google it.  I watched financial wonks from across the political spectrum.  Even the trickle down believers think its derriere rape for the middle class.

That's more of an outline. We won't know anything until the actual details are ironed out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2017, 10:42:36 AM
Basically, create Tommy Spicer LLC, have your paycheck sent there, and you will only pay 15%.  You're welcome.

That doesn't make any sense. If I'm a partner at Kirkland and Ellis and make about $2mm, I can't just have payroll pay into my LLC.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2017, 10:49:31 AM


Okay, so people earning less than $30k pay virtually no taxes under the new plan, and can still claim child care credits and mortgage interest. Also the standard deduction is doubled, so that helps those who earn around $40k or $50k with families. They'll likely end up paying nearly nothing in taxes as well.

The tax rate for the rich goes down to 35%, but the deductions and loopholes they've all been using up until now will be removed. Those are the same deductions that people complain about when spouting the "rich people don't pay taxes" nonsense. So I don't see how you can say that the rich are benefiting from this at a disproportionate level. Right now someone making $1mm a year has a tax rate of 39% but with all the deductions, they can easily get their effective tax rate down to 15%. I don't have all the details, but I can't see any way without those deductions how that would be possible under this new plan.

Those making under 30k likely don't own homes.  They will pay 10% over the 24k deduction.

Anyone rich enough can buy a property in Las Vegas (for example), incorporate as an LLC, pay no state taxes, and pay 15% in federal taxes.  And they can write off the mortgage interest to basically pay 0%.

Do you not see the con yet?



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2017, 10:53:08 AM
That doesn't make any sense. If I'm a partner at Kirkland and Ellis and make about $2mm, I can't just have payroll pay into my LLC.
This is why you are not an accountant.  I'm not either, but it is rediculously easy to move money around to work a rigged system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2017, 11:05:26 AM
This is why you are not an accountant.  I'm not either, but it is rediculously easy to move money around to work a rigged system.

How? An LLC's earnings are taxed at 15%. That millionaire's payroll is already taxed when he receives the money, then he invests it in his LLC. That pool of money in that shell LLC will only get taxed at 15% on any earnings. If it's a shell company, then they're not generating revenue. I don't understand where you're going with this. I can't just declare myself a corporation and have the company pay me and the government only taxing me at 15%. Is that what you're implying? Because that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2017, 11:36:24 AM
How? An LLC's earnings are taxed at 15%. That millionaire's payroll is already taxed when he receives the money, then he invests it in his LLC. That pool of money in that shell LLC will only get taxed at 15% on any earnings. If it's a shell company, then they're not generating revenue. I don't understand where you're going with this. I can't just declare myself a corporation and have the company pay me and the government only taxing me at 15%. Is that what you're implying? Because that's the dumbest thing I've ever heard.
Jesus man.  OK.  I'm a partner in a law firm...  I take just enough salary that I can write off the taxes in my home mortgage.  I take the rest of the money as a contractor to pay my 'people' and to cover business expenses.  That LLC buys a building for my 'people' to work in.  The mortgage intetest write off covers the 15% I should owe in taxes.

I pay 0 in taxes, and never had any 'people'.  Yet I own a home and a building.

You really don't see what Trump is doing here?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 27, 2017, 11:50:28 AM


Also, the FCC is going to gut Net Neutrality. This nonsense that it will create competition would be laughable if it weren't so awful. All it's going to do is cost jobs when smaller startups can't get an even footing on the carrier pipes while the biggest content producers pay more (and pass the costs to the consumer) to push their traffic.

Everyone against Net Neutrality can be categorized into either stupid or liar. There is no logical defense of their position beyond "We want to exploit consumers for more money" and none of them will admit it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2017, 12:01:10 PM
Jesus man.  OK.  I'm a partner in a law firm...  I take just enough salary that I can write off the taxes in my home mortgage.  I take the rest of the money as a contractor to pay my 'people' and to cover business expenses.  That LLC buys a building for my 'people' to work in.  The mortgage intetest write off covers the 15% I should owe in taxes.

I pay 0 in taxes, and never had any 'people'.  Yet I own a home and a building.

You really don't see what Trump is doing here?

What the freak is this excrement? Payroll can't split your compensation to accommodate two entirely different entities, especially if one is a corporation. Why don't you try that right now. Ask your HR dept if they can split your paycheck into two: one to yourself, and the other to an LLC. They'll laugh in your face.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2017, 12:05:44 PM

Everyone against Net Neutrality can be categorized into either stupid or liar. There is no logical defense of their position beyond "We want to exploit consumers for more money" and none of them will admit it.

I'm not that familiar with the net neutrality issue, but what are the implications exactly?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 27, 2017, 12:17:33 PM

Everyone against Net Neutrality can be categorized into either stupid or liar. There is no logical defense of their position beyond "We want to exploit consumers for more money" and none of them will admit it.

Yup.

Ajit Pai has the most punchable face this side of Ted Cruz. That guy is just a straight up poopchute and every time he opens his mouth I want to reduce the number of teeth he needs to brush.

While I feign anger about a lot of excrement, when I see the telcos speak giddily about this news it makes me actually angry. There isn't one thing about this that serves consumers in any fashion, today or in the future.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 27, 2017, 12:24:51 PM
I'm not that familiar with the net neutrality issue, but what are the implications exactly?

The protections in place commonly known as "Net Neutrality" dictate that the owners of the "pipes" that funnel the internet to everyone (the Verizons, AT&Ts, Spectrum, Comcast, etc.) can't dictate different pricing to different content providers (Netflix, Hulu, CNN, FOXNews, Facebook, Twitter, etc.). All data is simply 1s and 0s shooting over the connection and shouldn't be charged differently.

The protections were put in place to prevent, say, Verizon from charging Netflix double what they actually use because Verizon owns Redbox. Verizon can then provide Redbox streaming content again, and at lower cost, while Netflix has to raise prices to cover artificially inflated cost.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 27, 2017, 12:25:42 PM
I'm not that familiar with the net neutrality issue, but what are the implications exactly?
Yes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2017, 12:26:14 PM
The protections in place commonly known as "Net Neutrality" dictate that the owners of the "pipes" that funnel the internet to everyone (the Verizons, AT&Ts, Spectrum, Comcast, etc.) can't dictate different pricing to different content providers (Netflix, Hulu, CNN, FOXNews, Facebook, Twitter, etc.). All data is simply 1s and 0s shooting over the connection and shouldn't be charged differently.

The protections were put in place to prevent, say, Verizon from charging Netflix double what they actually use because Verizon owns Redbox. Verizon can then provide Redbox streaming content again, and at lower cost, while Netflix has to raise prices to cover artificially inflated cost.

Thanks!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2017, 03:26:24 PM
What the freak is this excrement? Payroll can't split your compensation to accommodate two entirely different entities, especially if one is a corporation. Why don't you try that right now. Ask your HR dept if they can split your paycheck into two: one to yourself, and the other to an LLC. They'll laugh in your face.
I'm not rich so I can't.  I know that you are naive, but this is already happening.  These changes would just make it easier.  Hell, no reason an LLC couldn't be a partner at a law firm anyway.  It's called pass through money.

Like I said, Tommy Spicer LLC.  Have them hire your company as a contractor, take no salary from youself, but take all the money you want from yourself.  15% income tax.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2017, 04:32:17 PM
I'm not rich so I can't.  I know that you are naive, but this is already happening.  These changes would just make it easier.  Hell, no reason an LLC couldn't be a partner at a law firm anyway.  It's called pass through money.

Like I said, Tommy Spicer LLC.  Have them hire your company as a contractor, take no salary from youself, but take all the money you want from yourself.  15% income tax.

You have pass through income all wrong. Pass through income isn't taxed at the corporate rate, but the income that the company generates is taxed at the individual tax rate. That's to prevent double taxation. Sure, you have consultants at many different firms who are, in-effect, self-employed, but you can't just establish an LLC and become a director at an investment bank, earn shares, get a bonus, and have your salary just pumped into your company instead of reporting it to the IRS as personal income. What conspiracy theory websites do you visit?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2017, 04:47:28 PM
You have pass through income all wrong. Pass through income isn't taxed at the corporate rate, but the income that the company generates is taxed at the individual tax rate. That's to prevent double taxation. Sure, you have consultants at many different firms who are, in-effect, self-employed, but you can't just establish an LLC and become a director at an investment bank, earn shares, get a bonus, and have your salary just pumped into your company instead of reporting it to the IRS as personal income. What conspiracy theory websites do you visit?
No.  Trumps plan taxes pass through money at 15%.  Try to keep up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 27, 2017, 04:55:14 PM
No.  Trumps plan taxes pass through money at 15%.  Try to keep up.

How is that a bad thing? The vast majority of pass-through entities are small companies who had to pay their net income at the individual tax rate. If I set up my own private consulting practice, and only have to pay 15% on my income, then great. I can use the rest to invest in my company.

You're talking about big corporations turning their highest paid employees into pass-through entities, which is just utter nonsense.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on April 27, 2017, 05:27:10 PM


How is that a bad thing? The vast majority of pass-through entities are small companies who had to pay their net income at the individual tax rate. If I set up my own private consulting practice, and only have to pay 15% on my income, then great. I can use the rest to invest in my company.

You're talking about big corporations turning their highest paid employees into pass-through entities, which is just utter nonsense.

I wasn't talking about that at all.

But the 35% rate will be paid by nobody with a good accountant, or any shred of intelligence.

The 10% will be paid by everyone in that bracket.

The 25% will be paid by everyone who rents.  Pretty much the vast majority of the middle class.

My biggest problem is that Trump and his buddies will make a fortune with this tax plan.  Meanwhile, it will add trillions to the debt.

The middle class will not get a raise.  It will not create more jobs.  This has been cannon since the 80's.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 28, 2017, 09:39:35 AM

I wasn't talking about that at all.

But the 35% rate will be paid by nobody with a good accountant, or any shred of intelligence.

The 10% will be paid by everyone in that bracket.

The 25% will be paid by everyone who rents.  Pretty much the vast majority of the middle class.

My biggest problem is that Trump and his buddies will make a fortune with this tax plan.  Meanwhile, it will add trillions to the debt.

The middle class will not get a raise.  It will not create more jobs.  This has been cannon since the 80's.

It's amazing how you're still clinging to that ridiculous notion that Trump is only proposing this plan to help himself and his buddies.

The plan eliminates the AMT, which was originally intended to ensure the rich paid their taxes, but was never adjusted for inflation (since 1969), so many middle class people now (including myself) have been affected by it.

The standard deduction is also doubling, which is great news for lower and middle class Americans. This means that anyone earning less than $30k will essentially pay zero taxes. Likely the same for filers earnings less than $60k. With no AMT and the double standard deduction, plus child care credits, low and mid income families may even see MORE in their refunds than they actually paid in taxes.


Also, most of the common deductions used by the wealthy will be rescinded. That includes most of the following:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170428/4b3bfaeafbe4c8c65ed2ec6269f9d6b3.jpg)

So you ask who will pay for these tax cuts? Just look at that list and add up how much the government had to pay back because of all those loopholes and deductions.

You also keep touting the lower corporate tax as a bad thing. Why? If your company pays less in taxes they're going to use the money to reinvest in the company. People like you just assume they'll just give themselves bonuses, which is utter nonsense, and completely irresponsible from a business standpoint.

I'm also hearing about a one time repatriation tax of 10% on money being parked overseas, which could bring billions back and add billions in lost tax revenue.

Lastly, the tax cuts in the early 80s resulted in a double-digit increase in yearly income for the middle class. Look it up.

So I suggest you focus on the facts and numbers rather than delving into these wild conspiracy theories. Also, it would help to download the actual budget, details on tax revenue, and then make your own decision given the data. You're smart enough to do that. Why go to some crazy liberal blog and have them regurgitate the data for you in order to fit their crazy narrative?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 28, 2017, 09:46:29 AM
You also keep touting the lower corporate tax as a bad thing. Why? If your company pays less in taxes they're going to use the money to reinvest in the company.

Good joke.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 28, 2017, 10:10:58 AM
So here's a question: if businesses can no longer deduct their contributions to health care plans from their taxes, and the ACA is repealed thereby no longer requiring people have health insurance, what's the incentive for businesses to continue paying anything into healthcare plans for their employees?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 28, 2017, 10:20:11 AM
Good joke.

Many large corporations, Microsoft is a good example, have billions sitting in cash. Sure they could just give everyone a fat bonus, but that's not how corporate finance works, and I doubt their shareholders would appreciate that very much.

The vast majority of companies in this country are small to mid-size, so the corporate tax break will benefit them and help keep them afloat and even expand.

Not every company is Exxon or Walmart.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on April 28, 2017, 10:22:34 AM
So here's a question: if businesses can no longer deduct their contributions to health care plans from their taxes, and the ACA is repealed thereby no longer requiring people have health insurance, what's the incentive for businesses to continue paying anything into healthcare plans for their employees?

I only heard about personal income deductions going away, and nothing about corporate deductions. I doubt they'd take that deduction away, but no one knows the full details of the plan yet.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 01, 2017, 05:28:21 PM
https://theintercept.com/2017/05/01/barack-obama-is-using-his-presidency-to-cash-in-but-harry-truman-and-jimmy-carter-refused/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 01, 2017, 05:37:45 PM
Meh. It's really hard to turn down that kind of cash for just showing up. I don't blame him. It's not like he used the presidency to get rich, he's getting rich because he was president. May as well milk it while it lasts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 01, 2017, 07:02:38 PM
Meh. It's really hard to turn down that kind of cash for just showing up. I don't blame him. It's not like he used the presidency to get rich, he's getting rich because he was president. May as well milk it while it lasts.
Well, he did bank 2 million in salary over 8 years with almost no expenses.  He was already rich off his books anyway.

The big difference will be watching his philanthropy.  Michelle and he got huge book deals.  They already said most of the proceeds are going to charity.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 01, 2017, 08:56:05 PM
https://theintercept.com/2017/05/01/barack-obama-is-using-his-presidency-to-cash-in-but-harry-truman-and-jimmy-carter-refused/

I don't have one single problem with this. He's entitled to it, he put up with more than enough of his fair share of bullshit while he was doing his job. I would take it. You would take it. I just don't think you can stand on the Bernie sanders side
of things anymore when you're accepting these type of checks from these types of people.  Then you're no better than Hillary (who I believe he slammed during his 2008 campaign for doing such things).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 01, 2017, 08:57:29 PM
"(CNN) Sen. Bernie Sanders believes former President Barack Obama's plan to receive $400,000 for speaking at a September Wall Street health conference is "distasteful," The Vermont Independent reported Friday.

Speaking with CNN's Suzanne Malveaux, Sanders labeled the transaction "not a good idea" and said he was "sorry President Obama made that choice."

"I just think it does not look good," Sanders said. "I just think it is distasteful -- not a good idea that he did that.

"Look, Barack Obama is a friend of mine, and I think he and his family represented us for eight years with dignity and intelligence," Sanders said. "But I think at a time when we have so much income and wealth inequality ... I think it just does not look good."

#Berned
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 01, 2017, 09:31:27 PM
I don't have one single problem with this. He's entitled to it, he put up with more than enough of his fair share of bullshit while he was doing his job. I would take it. You would take it. I just don't think you can stand on the Bernie sanders side
of things anymore when you're accepting these type of checks from these types of people.  Then you're no better than Hillary (who I believe he slammed during his 2008 campaign for doing such things).

The article isn't necessarily saying it's a bad thing, but just countering the argument that everyone else did it so he should too.

To be fair, it is different than what Clinton did because Obama won't be running for president in the future. So it's just a cash grab with no strings attached. He doesn't owe them anything.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 02, 2017, 12:27:51 AM
The article isn't necessarily saying it's a bad thing, but just countering the argument that everyone else did it so he should too.

To be fair, it is different than what Clinton did because Obama won't be running for president in the future. So it's just a cash grab with no strings attached. He doesn't owe them anything.
Let's be clear.  The Obama's have made it clear that this is not a cash grab.  If he takes 400k from wall street, 400k will be donated to fight assholes on wall street.

If he fails to do that, this becomes a conversation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on May 02, 2017, 01:39:04 AM
"(CNN) Sen. Bernie Sanders believes former President Barack Obama's plan to receive $400,000 for speaking at a September Wall Street health conference is "distasteful," The Vermont Independent reported Friday.

Speaking with CNN's Suzanne Malveaux, Sanders labeled the transaction "not a good idea" and said he was "sorry President Obama made that choice."

"I just think it does not look good," Sanders said. "I just think it is distasteful -- not a good idea that he did that.

"Look, Barack Obama is a friend of mine, and I think he and his family represented us for eight years with dignity and intelligence," Sanders said. "But I think at a time when we have so much income and wealth inequality ... I think it just does not look good."

#Berned
But I assume his wife's thefts and other illegal acts are not "distasteful" to the clown who gave us Trump

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 02, 2017, 06:24:14 AM
But I assume his wife's thefts and other illegal acts are not "distasteful" to the clown who gave us Trump

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk
I thought Russia gave us Trump. Get your conspiracies straight or admit Clinton royally fucked up the election.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on May 02, 2017, 07:37:43 AM
I thought Russia gave us Trump. Get your conspiracies straight or admit Clinton royally fucked up the election.
It was a combo plan.  The former commies from Russia and the current commie from VT were a championship tag team successfully destroying the USA

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 02, 2017, 08:05:43 AM
But I assume his wife's thefts and other illegal acts are not "distasteful" to the clown who gave us Trump

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



Did his wife steal some excrement from the White House snack bar or something?  Haven't heard of her stealing stuff.  Did she steal your heart?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 02, 2017, 09:51:39 AM
Okay, we really need to stop with the Russia conspiracy. It's turning into the 911 conspiracy crap I had to deal with for years. If Trump and his associates wanted to hack the DNC, why in the blue freak would they ask Russia to do it? I'm sure they could have afforded their own hackers. It just doesn't make any sense to involve a rival country and its leadership to "help" them win the election.

Hillary was an awful candidate, and she messed up. Trump was the outsider that got people who wouldn't otherwise vote to vote. They also concentrated their efforts on districts that they were most likely to win, whereas Clinton spent a ton of time in areas that would vote Democrat no matter what.

The DNC was excrement, Hillary's campaign was excrement, Russia obviously tried to influence the election, but this talk of collusion is absurd. I have no doubt that both campaigns tried to find ways to screw the other, but the idea of involving another country, especially a country like Russia, is way beyond nutty conspiracy level excrement.

Trump may very well be a terrible President, but enough of this "Trump is Putin's puppet" excrement. Be realistic. This is the real world, not some Tom Clancy novel.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 02, 2017, 10:11:22 AM
Trump may very well be a terrible President

Oh excrement, he's finally cracking
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 02, 2017, 10:16:31 AM
Oh excrement, he's finally cracking

Although I'm giving him a chance, he hasn't really done anything yet to make me think otherwise. Renegotiating NAFTA, beefing up border security and getting the wall built, and passing his tax cut plan are the main reasons why I voted for him. If he gets those done, then great. If not then I won't be voting for him if he decides to run for re-election (which I highly doubt he will).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 02, 2017, 10:35:22 AM
Tommy, we had to deal with years of Bengazi and emails.  Suck it up.

Those were investigations into wilful ignorance.

The Russia investigations are twofold.  We already know just about the entire cabinet had contact with Russia.  We already know that Russia took measures to help Trump win the election.  The logical next step, mostly because everyone seemed to lie about it, is whether there was collusion.

If half this stuff had happened, but it was Hillary, impeachment proceedings would already be well underway.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 02, 2017, 10:40:16 AM


Although I'm giving him a chance, he hasn't really done anything yet to make me think otherwise. Renegotiating NAFTA, beefing up border security and getting the wall built, and passing his tax cut plan are the main reasons why I voted for him. If he gets those done, then great. If not then I won't be voting for him if he decides to run for re-election (which I highly doubt he will).

He already got bitch slapped by NAFTA.  The wall is never going to be built.  His proposed tax reform bill would kill the middle class and add trillions to the deficit over 10 years.

The fact that those are the reasons you voted for him...  Really, a border wall? 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on May 02, 2017, 10:49:00 AM
Benghazi and emails were nonsense but the American Nazi Party wasted millions investigating

Putin's Puppet and the rest of his party treasonous collusion is nothing to care about according to his loyal spox Tommyanne

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on May 02, 2017, 10:50:22 AM
Did his wife steal some excrement from the White House snack bar or something?  Haven't heard of her stealing stuff.  Did she steal your heart?
Look it up.

Sanders Wife corruption

Easy for even you to find

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 02, 2017, 10:54:39 AM

He already got bitch slapped by NAFTA.

No.

Quote
The wall is never going to be built.

Wrong.

Quote
His proposed tax reform bill would kill the middle class and add trillions to the deficit over 10 years.

LOL
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 02, 2017, 10:55:02 AM
Look it up.

Sanders Wife corruption

Easy for even you to find

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



I'm an idiot, I was thinking you were talking about Trump's wife. I was reading a different post.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 02, 2017, 10:55:16 AM
Benghazi and emails were nonsense but the American Nazi Party wasted millions investigating

Putin's Puppet and the rest of his party treasonous collusion is nothing to care about according to his loyal spox Tommyanne

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk


It was all orchestrated by Rancid Preibus.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 02, 2017, 11:09:41 AM
It was a combo plan.  The former commies from Russia and the current commie from VT were a championship tag team successfully destroying the USA

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk
As if you wouldn't have gladly voted for Sanders in the general.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 02, 2017, 11:57:43 AM
No.

Wrong.

LOL
I can play that game.

Do a little research.  Or do better than 'no'.

75% of citizens in border states don't want a wall.  Theirs reps won't vote for.  $0 in the new budget for it.  Good luck.

Explain in detail how the proposed tax plan is anything but a cash grab for the wealthy.  'Lol' doesn't cut it here.  Avoid the landmines.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 02, 2017, 12:16:11 PM
I can play that game.

Do a little research.  Or do better than 'no'.

75% of citizens in border states don't want a wall.  Theirs reps won't vote for.  $0 in the new budget for it.  Good luck.

Explain in detail how the proposed tax plan is anything but a cash grab for the wealthy.  'Lol' doesn't cut it here.  Avoid the landmines.

We went over this before. I'm not getting into it again. If you want my response, go back a few pages. Your only argument was that the rich will declare themselves as LLCs and avoid paying income taxes. That's absurd. The majority of deductions will be removed, so this would more-or-less be a flat tax, and most of the deductions will benefit the lower and middle class than the rich. The rich will benefit through lowered capital gains taxes, which is where most of their income comes from anyway, and the lower corporate tax rate will help many struggling businesses. Not every company is a Trump Organization or an Exxon.

I read the current tax code. I read Trump's proposal. I used my own knowledge of corporate finance and accounting to determine the benefits of this plan. You probably didn't bother to do any of that and just read someone's blog that spun that ridiculous conspiracy that Trump's tax plan was written to only benefit himself and his friends. You're smarter than that, but you're stuck in this weird anti-corporate anti-rich bubble that's made out of iron that you simply will never break free from. I can spend hours talking about this, but your mind will never change. To change your mind, or to even see the other point of view, or hell even the facts would require you to change who you are. That ain't happening, so I'm no longer going to bother. As evidenced with this post, you took nothing from our previous conversation about the tax plan, and just reverted back to your old wildly ridiculous theories.

Have fun with that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on May 02, 2017, 01:42:52 PM
I'm an idiot, I was thinking you were talking about Trump's wife. I was reading a different post.



You moron butthole.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 02, 2017, 02:28:52 PM
We went over this before. I'm not getting into it again. If you want my response, go back a few pages. Your only argument was that the rich will declare themselves as LLCs and avoid paying income taxes. That's absurd. The majority of deductions will be removed, so this would more-or-less be a flat tax, and most of the deductions will benefit the lower and middle class than the rich. The rich will benefit through lowered capital gains taxes, which is where most of their income comes from anyway, and the lower corporate tax rate will help many struggling businesses. Not every company is a Trump Organization or an Exxon.

I read the current tax code. I read Trump's proposal. I used my own knowledge of corporate finance and accounting to determine the benefits of this plan. You probably didn't bother to do any of that and just read someone's blog that spun that ridiculous conspiracy that Trump's tax plan was written to only benefit himself and his friends. You're smarter than that, but you're stuck in this weird anti-corporate anti-rich bubble that's made out of iron that you simply will never break free from. I can spend hours talking about this, but your mind will never change. To change your mind, or to even see the other point of view, or hell even the facts would require you to change who you are. That ain't happening, so I'm no longer going to bother. As evidenced with this post, you took nothing from our previous conversation about the tax plan, and just reverted back to your old wildly ridiculous theories.

Have fun with that.
I don't read blogs.  I do my own research.  I look at historical data.  I am a numbers guy by trade.

The wolf in sheeps clothing is the doubling of the standard deduction.  That gave me pause.  Shocker, the earned income tax credit is gone.  Zero sum game for the lower class.  But I am honest enough to admit it helps the lower middle class.

The deductions that go away hurt the middle class and upper class equally, but they don't have the same buying power and resources.  The middle class takes this one on the chin.

And yes, the wealthy can store money in phony LLCs.  But the worst part is that deffered interest isn't going away, even though Trump promised it would, so wealthy investors can still pay all their income at 15%.

15% corporate tax is the lol craziest part of this.  That money will not go to new jobs or higher wages.  There is no money in that for the shareholders.  They will either buy other companies or buy stock in their own company to drive up the price.

Independant accounting sources have said this tax cut for the wealthy will cost from 1 to 6 trillion dollars in debt over the next 10 years.

Trickle down economics doesn't work.  30 years of history show that it doesn't create jobs, doesn't increase wages for anybody outside of upper management, and by no means whatsoever does it encourage reinvestment into the company.  Shareholders despise that.

Standard republican bullshit.  We're rich and want to be richer.  freak everyone else.

And don't get me started on the new healthcare bill.  We're rich and can afford healthcare.  freak everyone else.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on May 02, 2017, 03:25:27 PM
Just more trickle down GOP nonsense.

Reagan version failed beyond belief

And Bush Jr version nearly sunk the Nation into a catastrophic depression. Fortunately Obama saved America from it.

Now along comes a jerk who, unlike Reagan and Bush Jr is 1)an ignoramus and 2) a treasonous Putin tool and his version makes the prior two saviors of the middle class

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on May 02, 2017, 06:48:21 PM
Bush Jr was definitely an ignoramus

Amazing how trump's ineptitude is re-writing history about what type of president bush was, surely only a feat somebody like trump could accomplish
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on May 02, 2017, 10:01:05 PM
Meh we haven't had too many decent President's in my lifetime. They pretty much all have sucked.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: NDMick on May 03, 2017, 12:25:58 AM
Meh we haven't had too many decent President's in my lifetime. They pretty much all have sucked.

I got Bush 1-2, Clnton, 'Bama, Trump.

I am the Cleveland Browns of Presidents during my lifetime.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 03, 2017, 05:23:27 AM
I don't think it's possible to be a good president anymore. Not with the media and Congress.  You either do nothing right or do nothing at all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 03, 2017, 01:51:49 PM
Truly "good" Presidents are rare. How many can universally be hailed as good without dispute? Washington and who else? I can't think of another President that some believe were great that others don't have something negative to say about. That's the price of the job.

The question is: do they bring anything to the table? Reagan led us through the Cold War. Bush I led us through Desert Storm and his son through 9/11. Clinton and Obama were fantastic orators. Trump has nothing. He can't speak well, and his policies satisfy no one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 03, 2017, 02:37:39 PM
Truly "good" Presidents are rare. How many can universally be hailed as good without dispute? Washington and who else? I can't think of another President that some believe were great that others don't have something negative to say about. That's the price of the job.

The question is: do they bring anything to the table? Reagan led us through the Cold War. Bush I led us through Desert Storm and his son through 9/11. Clinton and Obama were fantastic orators. Trump has nothing. He can't speak well, and his policies satisfy no one.

I don't get why people are so enamored with good orators. All that matters is their policies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 03, 2017, 02:39:36 PM
I don't get why people are so enamored with good orators. All that matters is their policies.
Trump's policies are also terrible. Or subject to change depending on whom he spoke to last.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 03, 2017, 02:50:48 PM
I don't get why people are so enamored with good orators. All that matters is their policies.

I think the opposite.

A President's policies are largely inconsequential apart from his military leadership. Everything else has to snake through Congress and multiple committees long before he gets to put his Hancock on the paper.

The POTUS is the physical representation of our nation and the front facing dignitary to the outside world. He's also responsible for making speeches directly to the country--requiring solid oratory skills.

And the only reason I left Clinton and Obama at their oration is because I didn't want to have to deal with nonsense that neither was a "good" president. They both oversaw major economic recoveries (that the right will always claim was a product of their side's work), and they both had significant military action against enemies in the Middle East. Hell, Obama and Hillary directly oversaw the execution of this country's most wanted enemy and they still can't get any due credit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 03, 2017, 07:08:08 PM
Looks like new health care bill will pass in the House tomorrow.  Probably?  They say they have the votes but who the hell knows....

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/03/house-set-to-vote-on-gop-obamacare-replacement-bill-on-thursday-nbc-news.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on May 03, 2017, 09:52:28 PM
Thank god I live in a civilized nation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on May 03, 2017, 10:37:39 PM
Looks like new health care bill will pass in the House tomorrow.  Probably?  They say they have the votes but who the hell knows....

http://www.cnbc.com/2017/05/03/house-set-to-vote-on-gop-obamacare-replacement-bill-on-thursday-nbc-news.html
Not really worried much

TrumpCareDestroyal has considerably less than zero chance of gaining Senate approval

Just like the other 92 times the last 7 years that the House controlled by the American Nazi Party passed repeal of the ACA

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 03, 2017, 11:04:38 PM
I think it's a fantastic idea. The sooner Obamacare gets repealed, the sooner Trump supporters start dying. Get this excrement on the road and let's get the 2018 midterm campaigns rolling.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 04, 2017, 09:41:19 AM
I think it's a fantastic idea. The sooner Obamacare gets repealed, the sooner Trump supporters start dying. Get this excrement on the road and let's get the 2018 midterm campaigns rolling.

Jokes aside (and the fact that a lot of innocent people will probably die in the meantime) I think the best possible thing for the US is for the ACA to be repealed. It will shine a spotlight on just how little the GOP think of their constituents.

It's amazing to me that people on the right still support this group of sociopaths who 1) have been admitting for the last 24 hours that they haven't even read the bill they're planning to push through and 2) built in protections that exempt them from suffering the losses introduced by the bill.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on May 04, 2017, 10:23:42 AM
I wish we could just have a normal healthcare system like the rest of the civilized world. Will it ever happen? I don't know
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 04, 2017, 10:28:43 AM
A Republican Congressman from Maine is flying home due to a family medical emergency. But he's doing everything in his power to get back in time to cast his vote.

You can't make this excrement up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 04, 2017, 10:44:22 AM
The wealthy, and maybe Bruce Willis from Unbreakable, will love this bill.

Republicans are cruel motherfuckers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 04, 2017, 10:48:47 AM
The irony is that the people they trotted out to say how bad the ACA was for them, would be dead under this bill.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on May 04, 2017, 10:52:02 AM
The Republicans took an already shitty bill in the ACA and thought to themselves "how can we take this and make it even worse." I wasn't sure it was possible, but congratulations to them
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 04, 2017, 11:02:16 AM
They must have the votes to pass this thing, because I can't imagine the egg on all of their faces if it fails again. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 04, 2017, 11:14:08 AM
They must have the votes to pass this thing, because I can't imagine the egg on all of their faces if it fails again. 

The thing about it is I think they have the votes in the House to pass it, but they know it won't get through the Senate.

They're passing a bill that they know is terrible for Americans because they know it won't ever become law, but in the Senate they can point the blame for its failure at Democrats and say "See? No matter what we do, they've become the 'Party of No' now."

Either they're coldly calculating and manipulating their constituency, or they really do believe in what they're doing and are just truly oligarchic sociopaths. I honestly don't know which is true.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 04, 2017, 11:18:44 AM
Jokes aside (and the fact that a lot of innocent people will probably die in the meantime) I think the best possible thing for the US is for the ACA to be repealed. It will shine a spotlight on just how little the GOP think of their constituents.

It's amazing to me that people on the right still support this group of sociopaths who 1) have been admitting for the last 24 hours that they haven't even read the bill they're planning to push through and 2) built in protections that exempt them from suffering the losses introduced by the bill.

I wasn't actually joking, at all. The only thing that might make people wake up to their idiocy is when their loved ones start dying because the people they voted into power make their lives appreciably worse. Granted, they'll probably continue to gobble up the GOP excuses as to why it's the Clinton family's fault that their healthcare options suddenly got way, way shittier.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 04, 2017, 11:23:55 AM
The thing about it is I think they have the votes in the House to pass it, but they know it won't get through the Senate.

They're passing a bill that they know is terrible for Americans because they know it won't ever become law, but in the Senate they can point the blame for its failure at Democrats and say "See? No matter what we do, they've become the 'Party of No' now."

Either they're coldly calculating and manipulating their constituency, or they really do believe in what they're doing and are just truly oligarchic sociopaths. I honestly don't know which is true.
I was thinking the same thing.  Paul Ryan doesn't give a excrement if Trump and Turtle look bad.  At this point he knows that his job could be on the line in 2018.  If he shows he has the muscle to push this excrement out of the house, knowing full well that it is a horrific piece of legislation that will never pass the senate, he still gets a gold star.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on May 04, 2017, 11:24:18 AM
The thing about it is I think they have the votes in the House to pass it, but they know it won't get through the Senate.

They're passing a bill that they know is terrible for Americans because they know it won't ever become law, but in the Senate they can point the blame for its failure at Democrats and say "See? No matter what we do, they've become the 'Party of No' now."

Either they're coldly calculating and manipulating their constituency, or they really do believe in what they're doing and are just truly oligarchic sociopaths. I honestly don't know which is true.
So essentially it is the same useless drivel and  waste of time and taxpayer money that the House controlled by the American Nazi Tea Party rammed through around 82 times in the past 7 years only to die in the US Senate where sanity still prevails

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 04, 2017, 11:40:03 AM
I wasn't actually joking, at all. The only thing that might make people wake up to their idiocy is when their loved ones start dying because the people they voted into power make their lives appreciably worse. Granted, they'll probably continue to gobble up the GOP excuses as to why it's the Clinton family's fault that their healthcare options suddenly got way, way shittier.

I completely agree.

I was thinking the same thing.  Paul Ryan doesn't give a excrement if Trump and Turtle look bad.  At this point he knows that his job could be on the line in 2018.  If he shows he has the muscle to push this excrement out of the house, knowing full well that it is a horrific piece of legislation that will never pass the senate, he still gets a gold star.

My supposition is worse than that. Pushing it through, specifically with the intention of it failing is manipulative. Blaming Senate Democrats for the bill failing is a bid for even more unrestrained power when, come midterms, they can point at the left and say "See? We tried to do our jobs but they fillibuster everything. Get rid of them and we'll get to work!"

So essentially it is the same useless drivel and  waste of time and taxpayer money that the House controlled by the American Nazi Tea Party rammed through around 82 times in the past 7 years only to die in the US Senate where sanity still prevails

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

I really wish you'd stop with the name calling. You're a decent poster but you get excrement on because you use 3rd grade tactics to make your point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 04, 2017, 11:45:05 AM
I really wish you'd stop with the name calling. You're a decent poster but you get excrement on because you use 3rd grade tactics to make your point.

Amen. A little politeness goes a long way.

Although Tommyanne remains hilarious.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 04, 2017, 11:47:48 AM
Amen. A little politeness goes a long way.

Although Tommyanne remains hilarious.

Yeah, not gonna lie, that's gold.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 04, 2017, 12:22:06 PM
My supposition is worse than that. Pushing it through, specifically with the intention of it failing is manipulative. Blaming Senate Democrats for the bill failing is a bid for even more unrestrained power when, come midterms, they can point at the left and say "See? We tried to do our jobs but they fillibuster everything. Get rid of them and we'll get to work!"
The thing is, a filibuster will not be needed in the senate.  There are 2-4 republicans that want nothing to do with this.  Maybe more.  The adult table sees the impact this could have in 2018.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 04, 2017, 12:22:36 PM
I really wish you'd stop with the name calling. You're a decent poster but you get excrement on because you use 3rd grade tactics to make your point.
Next POTUS!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 04, 2017, 03:42:45 PM
Well, it must be a proud day for the handful of righties on the board.  The first step towards tens of millions of people losing insurance and tens of thousands dying is complete.  Feel free to suck each others dicks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on May 04, 2017, 03:44:49 PM
Well, it must be a proud day for the handful of righties on the board.  The first step towards tens of millions of people losing insurance and tens of thousands dying is complete.  Feel free to suck each others dicks.

I don't think it will pass, I wouldn't start worrying just yet.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 04, 2017, 04:36:10 PM
I don't think it will pass, I wouldn't start worrying just yet.
No, that garbage won't pass anything else as written.  Not worried at all.  Just awestruck at the hypocricy and retardation.

The Pro-Fetus party got a little victory, which annoys me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on May 04, 2017, 04:48:05 PM
No, that garbage won't pass anything else as written.  Not worried at all.  Just awestruck at the hypocricy and retardation.

The Pro-Fetus party got a little victory, which annoys me.


Yeah they hate all that isn't a wealthy WASP.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 04, 2017, 08:51:41 PM
Quote
THE AMERICAN HEALTH CARE ACT, which squeaked through the House of Representatives on Thursday, is terrible for many Americans in many ways. But what’s gotten almost no attention is the horrendous effect it could have on Americans in nursing homes.

Daniel Webster, a Republican representative from the 11th Congressional District in central Florida, acknowledged this when he announced he would vote for the AHCA.

“I have been very concerned about Florida’s Medicaid-funded nursing home beds,” Webster said. “These are critical to the access some of our senior population has to our nursing homes.”

Webster explained he was only willing to vote yes because President Donald Trump, Vice President Mike Pence and the House of Representatives’ GOP leadership promised that they would find some way to deal with the potential disaster created by the bill. It will now go to the Senate, and if some version of it is passed there, will then have to be reconciled with the House bill for a final vote.

https://theintercept.com/2017/05/04/house-gop-just-voted-to-slash-medicaid-which-pays-for-60-percent-of-people-in-nursing-homes/

There you have it. He knows it will be disastrous but voted for it because his bois promised they'd figure something out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 04, 2017, 08:56:19 PM
Meh we haven't had too many decent President's in my lifetime. They pretty much all have sucked.

This is my opinion on politics, in summary. This is the most desirable, most powerful job on the planet and we continually nominate assholes to occupy the postion. For real, the grading curve for politicians is "well at least he/she isn't as big of an poopchute as this person". We can't do better?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 04, 2017, 09:10:21 PM
This is my opinion on politics, in summary. This is the most desirable, most powerful job on the planet and we continually nominate assholes to occupy the postion. For real, the grading curve for politicians is "well at least he/she isn't as big of an poopchute as this person". We can't do better?
We, the voters, are to blame.  Good, honest people get picked apart in politics.  You have to be a liar or bend the truth to be a good politician.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 04, 2017, 09:11:54 PM
Good, honest people get picked apart in politics.


*looks at every SFD and dcm post about Sanders*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 04, 2017, 09:24:50 PM
*looks at every SFD and dcm post about Sanders*

Yeah except sanders is a 1%er masquerading as a hippie liberal, not a good person, nice try though.

And it hurt my feelings that you put me in the same category as dcm, I deserve it though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 04, 2017, 09:28:52 PM
Even though Ive poked a lot of fun at him, I'm pretty sure I'm on the record that I'm positive he would have won the last election in a landslide. And I would have preferred him to Hillary no matter my opinions on his platform. I've also poked fun at the DNC to ruffle feathers, but if I was a Sanders supporter I would pretty upset with and disillusioned with the DNC.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 04, 2017, 09:45:58 PM
Yeah except sanders is a 1%er masquerading as a hippie liberal, not a good person, nice try though.


No he isn't. Not even remotely. Why do you think that being a socialist and being moderately wealthy are incompatible?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 05, 2017, 12:21:54 AM
Sanders shoots for the moon on everything.  He will not live to see to the fruit of the seeds he has sown.  And he doesn't give a freak.  Yes, he's made some money, but he still looks like a homeless guy post makeover.  He's a good guy with a great mind and a big heart.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 05, 2017, 12:30:26 AM
No he isn't. Not even remotely. Why do you think that being a socialist and being moderately wealthy are incompatible?
The 80's doctrine man.  He who dies with the most toys wins.  Just like Jesus wanted it.

In fact, if Jesus had his way, fetuses would have guns in utero.  Abort this bitch!

Full disclosure...  Jesus does not agree with my sarcasm.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 05, 2017, 12:41:00 AM
I mean in all serious discussion, why do poor white people vote for republicans?

Guns and abortion.

What if the Dems just took guns off the table.  Like never talk about gun rights and have photo ops at gun ranges.  Remove the NRA as a political issue.

The guns are already here.  They are not leaving anyway.  Totally let it go.

Now to abortion.  With guns out of the way the Dems could focus on healthy babies.  Maybe they convince Cletus that babies are more important than fetuses, and show Cletus that republicans dont give a excrement about babies or their mothers.

I have heard too many Trump supporters admit this administration is horrible, but when asked if they would vote for him again?

Yeah, cuz ma gunz.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 05, 2017, 12:37:02 PM
No he isn't. Not even remotely. Why do you think that being a socialist and being moderately wealthy are incompatible?
Because we don't have actual socialists in the US so people have no frame of reference.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 05, 2017, 03:09:11 PM
Because we don't have actual socialists in the US so people have no frame of reference.
Just because people believe every citizen deserves...

Military
Police
Firemen
Roads
Bridges
Education
Food
Water
Healthcare

They get labeled as socialist.  Notice republicans have no problem with the first 3, but the later 3 are far more important, sort of essential.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 05, 2017, 03:44:23 PM
Just because people believe every citizen deserves...

Military
Police
Firemen
Roads
Bridges
Education
Food
Water
Healthcare

They get labeled as socialist.  Notice republicans have no problem with the first 3, but the later 3 are far more important, sort of essential.

I think a lot of Republicans think that when one new entitlement is given, people will become entitled and it will snowball to the point that every citizen will declare it their right to a personal butler.  Obviously I'm exaggerating and I'm not saying this is reasonable thinking, just saying people have that mentality.

BTW, as someone who has always leaned conservative, I have a heart and don't want to see anyone that is trying their best, the elderly and disabled, or children to suffer.  I don't claim to know what the best solution is for anything.  I would fail miserably as a politician.  That being said, one thing that burns me up to no end is to see people taking advantage of the system.  I know there are less people gaming the system than there are being legitimately helped by it, but I see it all the time and it pisses me off.  My wife works at a local health department and sees it all the time as well.  She freaking hates Trump, but is thoroughly pissed about these people.  People coming in on government assistance with high end clothes, newly done manicures, latest cell phones, etc.  It just makes it worse for people that need help.  I don't know what the solution for that is, but I want to falcon punch them when I see them.

I don't think this healthcare bill is the answer however.  Neither is Obamacare. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 05, 2017, 03:54:30 PM
I think a lot of Republicans think that when one new entitlement is given, people will become entitled and it will snowball to the point that every citizen will declare it their right to a personal butler.  Obviously I'm exaggerating and I'm not saying this is reasonable thinking, just saying people have that mentality.

BTW, as someone who has always leaned conservative, I have a heart and don't want to see anyone that is trying their best, the elderly and disabled, or children to suffer.  I don't claim to know what the best solution is for anything.  I would fail miserably as a politician.  That being said, one thing that burns me up to no end is to see people taking advantage of the system.  I know there are less people gaming the system than there are being legitimately helped by it, but I see it all the time and it pisses me off.  My wife works at a local health department and sees it all the time as well.  She freaking hates Trump, but is thoroughly pissed about these people.  People coming in on government assistance with high end clothes, newly done manicures, latest cell phones, etc.  It just makes it worse for people that need help.  I don't know what the solution for that is, but I want to falcon punch them when I see them.

I don't think this healthcare bill is the answer however.  Neither is Obamacare.
That is fair, but numbers don't lie.

For every person on welfare you see with nice clothes and a manicure, because god forbid they want a little self respect, there are 10,000 needy people that use the system as intended.

It's the same with the ACA.  For every red state with a cunty governor that wants it to fail, hurting his constituents in the process, there 10 states where it is working just fine.

Every sad story the republicans trot out is a joke.  Those same people would not be covered under Trumpcare.  A list that would include 30-40 million losing health care under the new bill.  I know the March number was 24 million, but this bill is far more terrifying.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 05, 2017, 04:15:12 PM
That is fair, but numbers don't lie.

For every person on welfare you see with nice clothes and a manicure, because god forbid they want a little self respect

I'm not talking about self-respect stuff.  You don't need the latest iphone for self-respect. That being said, I can't speak for how they came about nice things.  Maybe someone gave it to them, I don't know.  I'm talking about people not working because they'd rather have less money and be lazy than have a little more, work, and need less assistance.

You are right, the majority of people are legitimately helped.   
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 05, 2017, 04:19:21 PM
I think a lot of Republicans think that when one new entitlement is given, people will become entitled and it will snowball to the point that every citizen will declare it their right to a personal butler.  Obviously I'm exaggerating and I'm not saying this is reasonable thinking, just saying people have that mentality.

BTW, as someone who has always leaned conservative, I have a heart and don't want to see anyone that is trying their best, the elderly and disabled, or children to suffer.  I don't claim to know what the best solution is for anything.  I would fail miserably as a politician.  That being said, one thing that burns me up to no end is to see people taking advantage of the system.  I know there are less people gaming the system than there are being legitimately helped by it, but I see it all the time and it pisses me off.  My wife works at a local health department and sees it all the time as well.  She freaking hates Trump, but is thoroughly pissed about these people.  People coming in on government assistance with high end clothes, newly done manicures, latest cell phones, etc.  It just makes it worse for people that need help.  I don't know what the solution for that is, but I want to falcon punch them when I see them.

I don't think this healthcare bill is the answer however.  Neither is Obamacare. 

I grew up lower-middle-class in a very blue collar neighborhood. I'll never forget standing on line at the supermarket when a woman in a fur coat in front of me in line paid for her food with food stamps. And when she opened her wallet, it was stuffed with cash.

It was infuriating as someone who was buying food in the supermarket because both my parents were working their asses off to pay the bills so I had to do the shopping (I was in either Jr. high or high school at the time).

I definitely hate when people abuse the system.

At the same time, I've seen first-hand that many people on public assistance of some kind need it.

I agree that neither this bill nor the ACA are the answer. And I also firmly believe the answer in this country isn't as simple as "Let's just go single-payer." But the problem is: one side is, and has been, unwilling to work on a bipartisan solution that actually serves the populace.

Obama spent 8 years going on TV in front of the nation and saying "If you've got a better idea, present it and let's work on it." And he was ignored.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 05, 2017, 04:42:22 PM
So what exactly is wrong with the Senate redoing Obamacare? There's still going to be a health plan and there will have to be concessions on both sides. If anything, the Senate process should make it better.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 05, 2017, 04:49:02 PM
So what exactly is wrong with the Senate redoing Obamacare? There's still going to be a health plan and there will have to be concessions on both sides. If anything, the Senate process should make it better.

I do think it can only get better in the Senate.  That isn't saying a lot, but still.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 05, 2017, 04:56:16 PM
I do think it can only get better in the Senate.  That isn't saying a lot, but still.

Yeah, I don't get the outrage. Obamacare is failing, and insurance companies are leaving it left and right. Why not make it better? Obamacare was rushed. Let's take our time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 05, 2017, 07:07:26 PM
I don't think this healthcare bill is the answer however.  Neither is Obamacare.

Of course not. The question is how many permutations of excrement are they willing to drag us through before we ever get to single payer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 05, 2017, 07:08:11 PM
Yeah, I don't get the outrage. Obamacare is failing, and insurance companies are leaving it left and right. Why not make it better? Obamacare was rushed. Let's take our time.

Because they aren't making it better and some people don't have years to spare waiting to be covered again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on May 05, 2017, 08:15:55 PM
Love the new name for Trumpcare..

GOPDeathcare

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 06, 2017, 11:23:25 AM
http://ahca.republican/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 06, 2017, 11:29:57 AM
http://ahca.republican/

Hahahaha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 06, 2017, 12:07:37 PM
Yeah, I don't get the outrage. Obamacare is failing, and insurance companies are leaving it left and right. Why not make it better? Obamacare was rushed. Let's take our time.
Because, for the most part, the ACA isn't failing.  A handful of states are screwing it up, but it is otherwise working as intended.

By now we should have had some regulation on insurance and pharmaceutical companies, but the republicans have controlled congress.  Should have had a public option by now as well.

To nobodies surprise, the republicans bill went straight to, freak you, if you aren't wealthy, just die already.

The outrage is not over this bill passing.  It will never happen.  Anything the senate does to get 50 votes will make the house tea party vote no.

The March plan had 17% approval.  Once the details on this abortion come out, you can expect an even lower number.

No employer mandate.  Think about that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 07, 2017, 08:35:34 PM
Haha, this is awesome.

http://thehill.com/homenews/house/332199-dem-if-republicans-dont-answer-questions-on-health-bill-dems-should

"if he doesn't like it, he should stand up and explain it himself"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 13, 2017, 03:12:41 AM
I remember being in my early teens trying to figure out Iran/Contra.  I remember some of the Oliver 'under the bus' North hearings.  I remember a president avoiding impeachment with the words 'I don't recall,'

Turns out he probably wasn't lying.  He didn't recall what he had for breakfast at that point.

This is the craziest excrement I have seen in 30 years.

He told me 3 times I wasn't under investigation.  He invited me to dinner.  I just came up with the phrase 'prime the pump' the other day.  I invited a Russian spy into the oval office.

I'm not going to hate on an old man for having dementia anymore.  Time for the 25th amendment.  Then worry about prosecuting Pence, Turtle, and Ryan for malicious disregard for the welfare of this country.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 13, 2017, 11:29:06 AM
The law firm that Trump used to "prove" he has no significant business ties to Russia was recently named 2016 Russia Law Firm of the Year.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trumps-tax-law-firm-deep-ties-russia/story?id=47376041

You really can't make this excrement up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 13, 2017, 12:11:25 PM
The law firm that Trump used to "prove" he has no significant business ties to Russia was recently named 2016 Russia Law Firm of the Year.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/donald-trumps-tax-law-firm-deep-ties-russia/story?id=47376041

You really can't make this excrement up.

How do you sensationalists manage to breathe?

Morgan Lewis is the 13th largest law firm in the world, with offices in more than 30 countries. I know them well, former clients of mine, so I don't see how an international law firm representing Russian firms in all types of cases "Transaction services, capital markets, IP, etc" has anything to do with Trump. They provide the exact same services to firms in most countries. Trump using one of the best law firms for corporate and personal tax advisory services isn't an issue in any way shape or form.

"You can't make this stuff up."

I should be saying that about your dumbass post.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on May 13, 2017, 12:14:16 PM
Sorry Tommyanne but the only real Dumbass in this discussion is the Orange Maggot in the WH

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 13, 2017, 01:30:54 PM


How do you sensationalists manage to breathe?

Morgan Lewis is the 13th largest law firm in the world, with offices in more than 30 countries. I know them well, former clients of mine, so I don't see how an international law firm representing Russian firms in all types of cases "Transaction services, capital markets, IP, etc" has anything to do with Trump. They provide the exact same services to firms in most countries. Trump using one of the best law firms for corporate and personal tax advisory services isn't an issue in any way shape or form.

"You can't make this stuff up."

I should be saying that about your dumbass post.

Tommy.  Please.  Think optics here.  Just take a breath and think optics.

There are plenty of firms to use that were not named 2016 Russian law firm of the year.  Let's just get that out of the way.

As for the letter...  It has all the integrity of his doctor's letter.

Hey guys, they already know about Miss Universe and the BS land deal, so put that in there.

His own son said massive amounts of money are going back and forth to Russia.  It's all going through shell corporations.  Whether or not it is directly tied to the election, he and his people are helping hide and launder Russian money.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 13, 2017, 01:46:43 PM

Tommy.  Please.  Think optics here.  Just take a breath and think optics.

There are plenty of firms to use that were not named 2016 Russian law firm of the year.  Let's just get that out of the way.

As for the letter...  It has all the integrity of his doctor's letter.

Hey guys, they already know about Miss Universe and the BS land deal, so put that in there.

His own son said massive amounts of money are going back and forth to Russia.  It's all going through shell corporations.  Whether or not it is directly tied to the election, he and his people are helping hide and launder Russian money.

Christ. Yeah, optics because the public eat excrement up like this and don't bother to do their own research.

Firs of all, Chambers and Partners holds award ceremonies all over the world for "best law firm for (country)/(region)" Its all subjective based on what Chambers considers as "the best" given the last 12 months of work by a given firm. Hell my last firm held award ceremonies for the "best banking firms" etc. It doesn't mean much.

Never mind the fact that large firms in any given country are represented by many of the world's largest for a variety of cases. Anyway, the Chambers award that the media is using as clickbait for people like you was awarded to Morgan Lewis in 2016 for their transaction advisory work in Russia in 2015. This year they awarded that honor to Baker McKenzie, another of the world's largest law firms:

Quote
Russia Law Firm of the Year
Baker McKenzie
Dentons
Egorov Puginsky Afanasiev & Partners
Goltsblat BLP
Morgan, Lewis & Bockius LLP
Pepeliaev Group

Winner: Baker McKenzie

Long-established in Russia and consistently maintaining its ground and market positions, the firm has top-notch coverage of such key areas as domestic and international disputes as well as IP, life sciences, TMT, real estate, mining, employment and tax. The firm also benefits from its solid, on-the-ground presence in the CIS region and often handles cross-border transactions involving several regional jurisdictions. Recent highlight deals included advising Walgreens Boots Alliance on the sale of Alliance Healthcare Russia to a Russian-owned 36.6 pharmacy chain. It also assisted Alliance Mining Group with the sale of Amur Zoloto to Petropavlovsk.

Where you see some smoking gun, I see a bunch of idiots wearing tinfoil hats looking for any reason to go batshit insane over Trump and the ridiculous conspiracy of Russian collusion.

But go ahead and knock yourself out. If you want to burn calories on this bullshit that's your call.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 13, 2017, 01:47:46 PM
I was thinking about the roughly $300,000 I have paid in federal taxes so far in my working life.

W sent me a check for $200.

For the life of me I cannot think of any other benefit that directly impacted me.

Roads, police, fire...  All state and local taxes.  Glad to contribute.

At some point we should be allowed to demand a return on our federal investment.

Pass infrastructure and health care bills that are not just tax cuts for the rich.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 13, 2017, 01:54:34 PM
Christ. Yeah, optics because the public eat excrement up like this and don't bother to do their own research.

Firs of all, Chambers and Partners holds award ceremonies all over the world for "best law firm for (country)/(region)" Its all subjective based on what Chambers considers as "the best" given the last 12 months of work by a given firm. Hell my last firm held award ceremonies for the "best banking firms" etc. It doesn't mean much.

Never mind the fact that large firms in any given country are represented by many of the world's largest for a variety of cases. Anyway, the Chambers award that the media is using as clickbait for people like you was awarded to Morgan Lewis in 2016 for their transaction advisory work in Russia in 2015. This year they awarded that honor to Baker McKenzie, another of the world's largest law firms:

Where you see some smoking gun, I see a bunch of idiots wearing tinfoil hats looking for any reason to go batshit insane over Trump and the ridiculous conspiracy of Russian collusion.

But go ahead and knock yourself out. If you want to burn calories on this bullshit that's your call.
Tommy.  Not surprisingly you ignored the optics.  It just freaking looks bad.  If you are going to get your mommy to write you a note, in this case you probably wouldn't want your mommy to have the key to Moscow.

You at least have to admit the note is a joke.  You won't, but I was watching republicans tear it apart for an hour yesterday.

On the plus side, a couple of lawyers said it put a hole in confidentiality, so it should be that much easier to get a hold of his tax returns when the time comes.

Tommy.  When Trump's son said money was flowing in from Russia, was he lying?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 13, 2017, 02:10:39 PM
Tommy.  Not surprisingly you ignored the optics.  It just freaking looks bad.  If you are going to get your mommy to write you a note, in this case you probably wouldn't want your mommy to have the key to Moscow.

You at least have to admit the note is a joke.  You won't, but I was watching republicans tear it apart for an hour yesterday.

On the plus side, a couple of lawyers said it put a hole in confidentiality, so it should be that much easier to get a hold of his tax returns when the time comes.

Tommy.  When Trump's son said money was flowing in from Russia, was he lying?

Maybe it looks bad to people like you who wouldn't know the difference between M&A transaction advisory and tax advisory. Morgan Lewis has dozens of practice areas. Sheri Dillon is one of he heads of the firm's tax practice in the U.S, the team that handles Trump's taxes and represent him in audits with the IRS:

https://www.morganlewis.com/bios/sdillon

Also, Russia probably represents a small fraction of their international business. Why in the freak would they risk their entire firm's reputation for one fuckn' client and a small share of their international practice?

And I don't know the context about Jared's comments. Russia doesn't even crack the top 20 in FDI in the US in any industry, forget real estate (that honor goes to the U.K., China, and Japan). Maybe he meant Russian money has started to flow. I haven't done much research on that, but maybe he's right. Besides, why would they want Russian money anyway? There are plenty of other countries that are investing in the U.S without all the bullshit that comes with dealing with Russian companies. Just take a look at FDI into the U.S in the last several years:

http://ofii.org/sites/default/files/Foreign%20Direct%20Investment%20in%20the%20United%20States%202016%20Report.pdf

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 13, 2017, 02:15:00 PM
I was thinking about the roughly $300,000 I have paid in federal taxes so far in my working life.

W sent me a check for $200.

For the life of me I cannot think of any other benefit that directly impacted me.

Roads, police, fire...  All state and local taxes.  Glad to contribute.

At some point we should be allowed to demand a return on our federal investment.

Pass infrastructure and health care bills that are not just tax cuts for the rich.

Well around 70% goes towards social programs. You know, the programs that Democrats don't want touched or reformed.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170513/828539a26e56611aa3c3c7f30eb59004.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 13, 2017, 03:10:56 PM


Well around 70% goes towards social programs. You know, the programs that Democrats don't want touched or reformed.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170513/828539a26e56611aa3c3c7f30eb59004.png)

This is your primary glitch.

Social Security does not belong on this list.  It is not a tax.  Republicans borrowed from it, and now we are paying it back, but that was never supposed to happen.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 13, 2017, 03:14:22 PM
Maybe it looks bad to people like you who wouldn't know the difference between M&A transaction advisory and tax advisory. Morgan Lewis has dozens of practice areas. Sheri Dillon is one of he heads of the firm's tax practice in the U.S, the team that handles Trump's taxes and represent him in audits with the IRS:

https://www.morganlewis.com/bios/sdillon

Also, Russia probably represents a small fraction of their international business. Why in the freak would they risk their entire firm's reputation for one fuckn' client and a small share of their international practice?

And I don't know the context about Jared's comments. Russia doesn't even crack the top 20 in FDI in the US in any industry, forget real estate (that honor goes to the U.K., China, and Japan). Maybe he meant Russian money has started to flow. I haven't done much research on that, but maybe he's right. Besides, why would they want Russian money anyway? There are plenty of other countries that are investing in the U.S without all the bullshit that comes with dealing with Russian companies. Just take a look at FDI into the U.S in the last several years:

http://ofii.org/sites/default/files/Foreign%20Direct%20Investment%20in%20the%20United%20States%202016%20Report.pdf
Ignoring all the other crap.  It wasn't his son in law that said it.  FFS if we are going to have an intelligent debate...

Jared is another issue entirely.  He is raking in cash from China on the DL while Russia is in the spotlight.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 13, 2017, 03:38:17 PM
Ignoring all the other crap.  It wasn't his son in law that said it.  FFS if we are going to have an intelligent debate...

Jared is another issue entirely.  He is raking in cash from China on the DL while Russia is in the spotlight.

I don't see one Chinese or Russian company on his company's partner list:

https://kushner.com/partners/

Doesn't sound like he needs them. Maybe individual investors from China or Russia? If so, so what? I imagine he has investors from all over the world.

You really are going out of your way in making a lot out of nothing.

I'll say this again. Neither the Trump Organization nor Kushner's company needs Russian or Chinese investment, not nearly enough to risk their careers over. There's plenty of other investors, mostly domestic, who are perfectly willing to invest in their projects. It doesn't make any sense to go on and on about Russia.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 13, 2017, 04:22:02 PM
I don't see one Chinese or Russian company on his company's partner list:

https://kushner.com/partners/

Doesn't sound like he needs them. Maybe individual investors from China or Russia? If so, so what? I imagine he has investors from all over the world.

You really are going out of your way in making a lot out of nothing.

I'll say this again. Neither the Trump Organization nor Kushner's company needs Russian or Chinese investment, not nearly enough to risk their careers over. There's plenty of other investors, mostly domestic, who are perfectly willing to invest in their projects. It doesn't make any sense to go on and on about Russia.
You are absolutely right Tommy.  It makes no sense for them to risk it.  They just don't give a freak and think they are above the law.

And for the love of god.  You sited his own site for a list of partners?

Do you have any freaking clue how much Russian and Chinese money is parked in the 666 and Trump towers?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 13, 2017, 06:07:05 PM
I'm drunk.  America!!!! Wooooo!!!!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on May 13, 2017, 07:24:43 PM
9-11 was an inside job
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 13, 2017, 08:49:16 PM
9-11 was an inside job
Wooooo!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 14, 2017, 10:12:40 PM
https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2017/06/his-kampf/524505/?utm_source=atlfb
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 16, 2017, 12:04:02 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/16/slain-dnc-staffer-had-contact-with-wikileaks-investigator-says.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 17, 2017, 01:03:30 PM
Surprised you guys haven't been talking about NY single payer having a shot now.

What's the general feeling at ground zero?  Does it have a chance in the Senate?

From afar the bill looks legit.  I hope it passes and proves it is sustainable over time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 17, 2017, 02:25:54 PM
Surprised you guys haven't been talking about NY single payer having a shot now.

What's the general feeling at ground zero?  Does it have a chance in the Senate?

From afar the bill looks legit.  I hope it passes and proves it is sustainable over time.

Apparently the plan is essentially to raise taxes. I really hate when they use the phrase "Pay their fair share". Such bullshit. Just call it what it is "raising taxes".

Quote
Financing

We propose an equitable financing program in which everyone pays their fair share. Under this program, all employers and employees will pay a modest payroll tax. This will produce a dramatic savings for those responsible private employers and state and local governments which currently purchase health insurance for their employees. By drawing on the immense wealth that has accrued to the richest Americans and large corporations over the past 25 years, 95% of people will pay less for their healthcare than they are currently paying. Some of the key components to financing HR 676:
Eliminates all employer contributions to private insurance premiums—replacing them with a modest payroll tax of 4.5% (in addition to the 1.45% currently paid towards Medicare).
Eliminates all individual premiums, co-pays, deductibles and nearly all other out-of-pocket costs—replacing them with a modest payroll tax of 3.3% (in addition to the 1.45% currently paid towards Medicare).
Relieves state and local governments of the immense burden of paying insurance premiums for medical coverage for their current and retired employees—replacing them with a modest payroll tax of 4.5% (in addition to the 1.45% currently paid towards Medicare).

Source: http://www.singlepayernewyork.org/single-payer/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 17, 2017, 02:36:54 PM
Surprised you guys haven't been talking about NY single payer having a shot now.

What's the general feeling at ground zero?  Does it have a chance in the Senate?

From afar the bill looks legit.  I hope it passes and proves it is sustainable over time.

Honestly, I hadn't even heard about it. I just looked around for some information and there's no chance this thing sees the light of day. I didn't find anything solid, but it looks like it would be too expensive to maintain, and there's no chance it would pass the state Senate where there's an even split between the two parties.

I don't see how a state level single-payer option is feasible anywhere in the country. Not without massive tax increases. It either has to be country-wide, or not at all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 17, 2017, 02:40:24 PM
So wait, a 13.3% tax increase on top of Medicare? Yeah, that's going to go over well.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 17, 2017, 04:03:34 PM
So wait, a 13.3% tax increase on top of Medicare? Yeah, that's going to go over well.

Fair share?!?@!@#?@#$?$#@$
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on May 17, 2017, 04:08:42 PM
9-11 was an inside job

311 was an inside job.
https://youtu.be/ny-Xxjcu3pQ
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 17, 2017, 04:14:34 PM
To be honest, if you have a healthy, potentially larger workforce paying significantly less for health care, they are going to spend more money.  A boost in the economy goes right back to the 5%.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 17, 2017, 04:16:10 PM
So wait, a 13.3% tax increase on top of Medicare? Yeah, that's going to go over well.
Where did you see the 13.3% in there?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 17, 2017, 04:20:16 PM
Also, are you sure that link is current?  It is copyrighted 2011 and sites studies from 2002 and 2004...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 17, 2017, 04:26:29 PM
Where did you see the 13.3% in there?

I did the math, but it may have been wrong. Maybe the 4.5% listed twice is the same charge. So it would be 8.8% on top of Medicare. I still don't see how that's going to fly.

Do businesses pay almost 9% of their income in healthcare costs?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 17, 2017, 06:22:43 PM
I did the math, but it may have been wrong. Maybe the 4.5% listed twice is the same charge. So it would be 8.8% on top of Medicare. I still don't see how that's going to fly.

Do businesses pay almost 9% of their income in healthcare costs?
I think it meant normal businesses, self employed, and government.  The explanaiton was not worded very well.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 17, 2017, 07:12:19 PM
I think it meant normal businesses, self employed, and government.  The explanaiton was not worded very well.

Good old government making things easy to understand.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 17, 2017, 08:01:36 PM
Good old government making things easy to understand.

The figures quoted appear to be from a PAC.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on May 20, 2017, 10:48:08 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/05/16/slain-dnc-staffer-had-contact-with-wikileaks-investigator-says.html

The Seth Rich "investigator" was exposed as a fraud so better luck next time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 25, 2017, 08:20:38 AM
A piece of excrement pol in Montana attacked a reporter the day before the election (which is today).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 25, 2017, 09:19:03 AM
A piece of excrement pol in Montana attacked a reporter the day before the election (which is today).

Is this the equivalent of failing a drug test at the NFL combine?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 25, 2017, 10:52:35 AM
He wasn't even arrested at first. It turns out the sheriff is a campaign contributor.

He's since been charged with a misdemeanor. It was probably hard to sweep under the rug once Fox News reporters who witnessed it reported it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 25, 2017, 07:13:23 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170526/dcac8834628f1e86f55c9c24b53c438c.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 25, 2017, 07:41:11 PM
Only in Montana.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 26, 2017, 07:22:49 AM
Probably not too difficult. Newspaper reporters are mostly nerdy dudes who weigh like 120lbs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 26, 2017, 07:48:37 AM
He still won the election.  I guess there were quite a few absentee ballots already submitted.  I guess if the guy owns up to screwing up and being an poopchute, it'll all blow over after a while.  If he apologizes with conditions and explanations, it will follow him. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 26, 2017, 07:57:34 AM
Keep bodyslamming reporters, MAGA
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 26, 2017, 09:55:44 AM
freak Montanans.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 26, 2017, 03:42:29 PM
He still won the election.  I guess there were quite a few absentee ballots already submitted.  I guess if the guy owns up to screwing up and being an poopchute, it'll all blow over after a while.  If he apologizes with conditions and explanations, it will follow him.
He's a young Earth creationist who got rich by outsourcing jobs from the US. Nothing deserves to blow over for him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 26, 2017, 04:10:06 PM
He's a young Earth creationist who got rich by outsourcing jobs from the US. Nothing deserves to blow over for him.

I don't know the guy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 27, 2017, 12:20:10 PM
He's a young Earth creationist who got rich by outsourcing jobs from the US. Nothing deserves to blow over for him.

Jeez, working for the govt really turned you into a bit of a commie.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 27, 2017, 03:33:55 PM
Jeez, working for the govt really turned you into a bit of a commie.

You voted for a guy whose platform was anti-outsourcing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 30, 2017, 10:30:36 AM
Quote
Tempers flared in at the Texas State Capitol in Austin on Monday afternoon when a debate over tightening immigration laws (i.e. Senate Bill 4) turned into a scuffle filled with ungentlemanly language and threats.
It all began after State Rep. Matt Rinaldi (R-Irving) said he called U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) on hundreds of protesters dressed in red t-shirts chanting in opposition to the immigration law.
Rinaldi said in a statement on Facebook that after his actions enraged state Rep. Poncho Nevarez (D-Eagle Pass) and other Hispanic lawmakers to where his life was threatened. He’s now under protective custody by the Department of Public Safety.
“Today, Representative Poncho Nevarez threatened my life on the House floor after I called ICE on several illegal immigrants who held signs in the gallery which said ‘I am illegal and here to stay.'” Rinaldi wrote noting that several Democrats encouraged the protesters to break the law. “When I told the Democrats I called ICE, Representative Ramon Romero physically assaulted me, and other Democrats were held back by colleagues.”

Lolllllllll
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 30, 2017, 11:19:37 AM
What kind of fuckn idiot goes to a rally and announces that they're here illegally?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 30, 2017, 11:33:12 AM
What kind of fuckn idiot goes to a rally and announces that they're here illegally?
Lots of crazy on all sides
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 30, 2017, 11:34:48 AM
Lots of crazy on all sides

But they're not even a side really. They're not citizens, can't vote, and pay no taxes. Who are they to demand that they be allowed to hang around despite being here illegally?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 30, 2017, 11:36:34 AM
pay no taxes

https://itep.org/immigration/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 30, 2017, 03:19:34 PM
What kind of fuckn idiot goes to a rally and announces that they're here illegally?

I mean Hillary Clinton had them on stage for the whole country a few months ago bragging about how they're illegal. Half the country thinks it's cool if you're here illegally
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 30, 2017, 03:26:37 PM
https://itep.org/immigration/

They're paying so little that it's borderline not paying anything
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on May 30, 2017, 03:27:55 PM
https://itep.org/immigration/
Tommyanne must get his "facts" from the same place Spicey gets his.

As the chart shows Undocumenteds in pooper Texas paid 1.5 billion in taxes in that year

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 30, 2017, 03:52:33 PM
They're paying so little that it's borderline not paying anything
Which is still more than what a lot of citizens pay.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 30, 2017, 03:54:35 PM
Which is still more than what a lot of citizens pay.

Well considering they're factoring in sales tax I'd imagine it's at the very least similar to what many citizens who don't pay federal income tax are paying.

Of course there's also that small difference of those citizens actually being citizens of this country
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 30, 2017, 03:59:48 PM
Well considering they're factoring in sales tax I'd imagine it's at the very least similar to what many citizens who don't pay federal income tax are paying.

Of course there's also that small difference of those citizens actually being citizens of this country
I forgot illegals don't pay sales tax.

Waitasekent
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 30, 2017, 04:01:57 PM
I forgot illegals don't pay sales tax.

Waitasekent

My point was that Americans who don't pay federal income taxes are paying sales tax too.

Which means the  poorest Americans are probably paying roughly the same amount of taxes as illegals.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 30, 2017, 04:12:40 PM
Before I get dragged into some stupid argument on behalf of a cause I'm not particularly passionate about, I'm just pointing out excrement that isn't true.

Generally if an undocumented worker has gone through the trouble of getting a TIN, they plan to eventually become a citizen.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 30, 2017, 07:36:27 PM
https://itep.org/immigration/

Obviously they buy excrement that's taxed, but that's not the point. They shouldn't be in this country in the first place, and they're literally continuing to break the law by staying here. Why are you so quick to defend illegal immigration? If you got a job in Germany on a work visa, get fired, then stay in the country working under the table, would you really be surprised or want sympathy if you got caught and deported even though you're paying hundreds of bucks a month in taxes for your steins of beer?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 30, 2017, 07:39:03 PM
Obviously they buy excrement that's taxed, but that's not the point. They shouldn't be in this country in the first place, and they're literally continuing to break the law by staying here. Why are you so quick to defend illegal immigration? If you got a job in Germany on a work visa, get fired, then stay in the country working under the table, would you really be surprised or want sympathy if you got caught and deported even though you're paying hundreds of bucks a month in taxes for your steins of beer?

I'm not defending illegal immigration, I'm pointing out the incorrectness of your statement.

Why are you so determined to pee into the wind rather than accept reality?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 30, 2017, 09:55:46 PM
I'm not defending illegal immigration, I'm pointing out the incorrectness of your statement.

Why are you so determined to pee into the wind rather than accept reality?

Fine, I can withdraw that entire statement and simply say "Why does anyone who's here illegally think they have a right to stay?" A 5 year citizen old can't vote and doesn't pay taxes, but he can complain all he wants. These people all broke the law.

Why do I have to accept a reality of illegals flaunting their status and people defending their alleged "right" to be here? That doesn't make any sense. If they're here quietly, that's one thing, but we've seen Clinton parading them onstage to raucous applauses, illegals openly asking questions in town halls, and now protesting while proudly wearing shirts identifying their unlawful status in this country.

I don't see why it's difficult to get rid of illegals. Punish those businesses who hire them, make state ID or a social security card a recruitment for sending money overseas, and increase border security. Tighten both the supply and demand for illegal immigration and we'll see their numbers decrease. Also start rigorously enforcing immigration laws - if you get arrested and are found to be here illegally, you're out. Caught running a red light? Should've been more careful, or better yet don't get behind the wheel since you're not even supposed to be driving when you're undocumented.

If you have children who were born here, let's give the parents a path to citizenship provided they don't have a criminal record. No kids? Get out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 30, 2017, 10:05:31 PM
No kids? Get out.

You're gonna see some illegals going in raw dog with that policy, chief.  Cromartie style.  9 months to a path.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 31, 2017, 09:07:30 AM
I am sick of first or second generation Americans bitching about people being here illegally.  Your parents or grandparents walked through a wide open front door, and in most cases, didn't pay a god damned penny to become citizens.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 31, 2017, 09:10:58 AM
Fine, I can withdraw that entire statement and simply say "Why does anyone who's here illegally think they have a right to stay?" A 5 year citizen old can't vote and doesn't pay taxes, but he can complain all he wants. These people all broke the law.

Why do I have to accept a reality of illegals flaunting their status and people defending their alleged "right" to be here? That doesn't make any sense. If they're here quietly, that's one thing, but we've seen Clinton parading them onstage to raucous applauses, illegals openly asking questions in town halls, and now protesting while proudly wearing shirts identifying their unlawful status in this country.

I don't see why it's difficult to get rid of illegals. Punish those businesses who hire them, make state ID or a social security card a recruitment for sending money overseas, and increase border security. Tighten both the supply and demand for illegal immigration and we'll see their numbers decrease. Also start rigorously enforcing immigration laws - if you get arrested and are found to be here illegally, you're out. Caught running a red light? Should've been more careful, or better yet don't get behind the wheel since you're not even supposed to be driving when you're undocumented.

If you have children who were born here, let's give the parents a path to citizenship provided they don't have a criminal record. No kids? Get out.

Like Badger, I don't have especially strong feelings on the topic. I'm amused though that you in your role as Mr Free Markets Guy have such a hardline position on it, because it flies in the face of several of those principles.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 31, 2017, 09:15:07 AM
I am sick of first or second generation Americans bitching about people being here illegally.  Your parents or grandparents walked through a wide open front door, and in most cases, didn't pay a god damned penny to become citizens.

We live in a different world today than we did then. Economics, crime, terrorism, drugs were all completely different 50-150 years ago than they are today. Not to mention the quantities of people coming illegally has presumably increased substantially.

I'm all for immigration. But why the freak shouldn't the United States choose the best and brightest? There's billions of people in the world, more of them want to be in the United States than anywhere else on earth.

Let's cherry pick the hard working, educated, skilled, those without criminal records. Why the freak should we instead reward those who came here illegally simply because they broke federal law.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 31, 2017, 09:15:22 AM
Like Badger, I don't have especially strong feelings on the topic. I'm amused though that you in your role as Mr Free Markets Guy have such a hardline position on it, because it flies in the face of several of those principles.
Tommy could start a recruiting agency for field work and housekeeping, offer $5 an hour with no benefits, and only hire US citizens.  Watch how fast he would prove you wrong.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 31, 2017, 09:24:18 AM


We live in a different world today than we did then. Economics, crime, terrorism, drugs were all completely different 50-150 years ago than they are today. Not to mention the quantities of people coming illegally has presumably increased substantially.

I'm all for immigration. But why the freak shouldn't the United States choose the best and brightest? There's billions of people in the world, more of them want to be in the United States than anywhere else on earth.

Let's cherry pick the hard working, educated, skilled, those without criminal records. Why the freak should we instead reward those who came here illegally simply because they broke federal law.

You're doing the Trump thing here.  First off, the economy was growing much faster back then, every known statistic shows that immigrants are less likely to commit crime, there hasn't been a terrorist attack committed by an illegal, and 99% of drugs come in on trucks.

Until we put the statue of liberty in a museum and give the country back to the native americans, we are a country of immigrants.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 31, 2017, 09:30:42 AM

You're doing the Trump thing here.  First off, the economy was growing much faster back then, every known statistic shows that immigrants are less likely to commit crime, there hasn't been a terrorist attack committed by an illegal, and 99% of drugs come in on trucks.

Until we put the statue of liberty in a museum and give the country back to the native americans, we are a country of immigrants.

Yes the economy was growing faster then so there was a surplus of unskilled labor for all the immigrants.

I'm gonna call bullshit on illegals are less likely the commit a crime. Even when not including thst the act of coming here illegally is commiting a crime.

A terrorist attack hasn't been committed by an illegal? I guess you haven't followed news in Europe in recent years

And 99% of drugs coming in by truck is probably also bullshit.

And yes nobody is saying immigration is bad. The fact is only a limited number of people can be here. You can even put a process in place where you select the best and brightest, or just let anybody do whatever the freak they want. I have no freaking idea whatsoever how anybody could support letting people do whatever they want however they want.

Honestly I could give a excrement if they even gave citizenship to all the people currently here illegally, as long as they made solid clear rules going forward
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 31, 2017, 09:36:44 AM


Yes the economy was growing faster then so there was a surplus of unskilled labor for all the immigrants.

I'm gonna call bullshit on illegals are less likely the commit a crime. Even when not including thst the act of coming here illegally is commiting a crime.

A terrorist attack hasn't been committed by an illegal? I guess you haven't followed news in Europe in recent years

And 99% of drugs coming in by truck is probably also bullshit.

I love the fact you counter me with, 'I'm not going to research this, and I admit I have no clue about the statistics, but my all knowing gut tells me you are wrong.'

If you are freely admitting, as you have done countless times, that you have no idea what the freak you are talking about, why do you enter the discussion?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 31, 2017, 09:42:21 AM

I love the fact you counter me with, 'I'm not going to research this, and I admit I have no clue about the statistics, but my all knowing gut tells me you are wrong.'

If you are freely admitting, as you have done countless times, that you have no idea what the freak you are talking about, why do you enter the discussion?

I did as much research as you did. Bent over and pulled it out of my derriere. Only difference is I don't pretend to have done research or just say that everything is a known fact without backing it up.

Regardless the very crux of my idea is solid. There's no reasonable reason not to have a solid process and set of rules in place for people to selectively come in legally. The idea that people have to come here illegally and there can't be a process for them to come legally  is more freaking retarded than NFL players getting lap bands.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 31, 2017, 09:48:19 AM
I did as much research as you did. Bent over and pulled it out of my derriere. Only difference is I don't pretend to have done research or just say that everything is a known fact without backing it up.

Regardless the very crux of my idea is solid. There's no reasonable reason not to have a solid process and set of rules in place for people to selectively come in legally. The idea that people have to come here illegally and there can't be a process for them to come legally  is more freaking retarded than NFL players getting lap bands.
For one, you admittedly pull your opinions out your derriere.  To say I don't do my own research is presumptuous at best, retarded at worst.

On the plus side, you apparently have the qualifications to be president some day.  Myself?  I'll vote for Pedro.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 31, 2017, 09:51:13 AM
There's no reasonable reason

(https://m.popkey.co/ea7a98/k8DQE_f-maxage-0_s-200x150.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on May 31, 2017, 09:51:54 AM

I love the fact you counter me with, 'I'm not going to research this, and I admit I have no clue about the statistics, but my all knowing gut tells me you are wrong.'

If you are freely admitting, as you have done countless times, that you have no idea what the freak you are talking about, why do you enter the discussion?

Lap band surgery makes you more intelligent, it's almost like staying in a Holiday Inn Express. DCM knows everything about everything just ask him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 31, 2017, 10:05:28 AM
Like Badger, I don't have especially strong feelings on the topic. I'm amused though that you in your role as Mr Free Markets Guy have such a hardline position on it, because it flies in the face of several of those principles.
To be fair Trump doesn't believe in free markets either.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 31, 2017, 10:43:00 AM
To be fair Trump doesn't believe in free markets either.

Did you know it's unfair that Germany has a trade surplus? Sad. Assholes actually saving and not spending their money on American goods? So unfair!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on May 31, 2017, 11:07:04 AM
Did you know it's unfair that Germany has a trade surplus? Sad. Assholes actually saving and not spending their money on American goods? So unfair!
You mean Germans don't want to buy American cars?  I cannot fathom why.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 31, 2017, 11:24:35 AM
You mean Germans don't want to buy American cars?  I cannot fathom why.

It's all Merkel's fault. Such a nasty woman.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 31, 2017, 12:17:53 PM
I am sick of first or second generation Americans bitching about people being here illegally.  Your parents or grandparents walked through a wide open front door, and in most cases, didn't pay a god damned penny to become citizens.

Okay, you can stop right there. My parents had to jump through hoops to come to this country while they watched their brothers and sisters get denied and left behind. Don't give me that excrement. Lots of legal immigrants had to bust their asses to get here legally, not just pay someone to drive them across the border.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 31, 2017, 12:18:59 PM
Like Badger, I don't have especially strong feelings on the topic. I'm amused though that you in your role as Mr Free Markets Guy have such a hardline position on it, because it flies in the face of several of those principles.

The free market would take care of the issue if we didn't have a minimum wage.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 31, 2017, 12:26:19 PM
The free market would take care of the issue if we didn't have a minimum wage.

Why? There's nothing preventing citizens from standing at Home Depot parking lots to do illegal cash jobs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on May 31, 2017, 12:36:59 PM
Why? There's nothing preventing citizens from standing at Home Depot parking lots to do illegal cash jobs.

I'm willing to bet that the vast majority of the "under the table" work in this country is done by citizens looking for some extra work here and there or freelance.

The big advantage most illegals have are a community support system and family. Most poor citizens don't have that kind of support, poor black communities are a good example. Compare that with immigrant communities elsewhere. When my father came to this country, people from his village or nearby areas who were already settled had connections and even a place to stay while he got situated. Loans etc. Mexican and Chinese illegals have the same. Poor Americans do not because if they did they wouldn't be poor in the first place.

You can work off the books for a while and send a portion of a week's pay to poor countries where that money can feed an entire family for a month, or you can be a citizen that has to support his family stateside, without the other benefits of a large immigrant community.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 10:58:14 AM
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/01/hillary-clinton-says-americans-guided-russias-attack-on-her-campaign.html

Hillary blames the DNC for being bankrupt and having terrible incorrect data when she got the nomination

Then says Americans guided the Russians to help win the election
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 01, 2017, 11:33:24 AM
http://www.cnbc.com/2017/06/01/hillary-clinton-says-americans-guided-russias-attack-on-her-campaign.html

Hillary blames the DNC for being bankrupt and having terrible incorrect data when she got the nomination

Then says Americans guided the Russians to help win the election

Can't wait till a cushy district is found so her dopey daughter can launch her political career.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 01, 2017, 12:00:04 PM
Can't wait till a cushy district is found so her dopey daughter can launch her political career.
Please god no.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 01, 2017, 12:18:28 PM
Oh yeah Chelsea Clinton 2024....... woohooo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on June 01, 2017, 12:24:59 PM
Meanwhile we have Uday, Kusay, Ivanka and Jared assisting Dad Saddam in stealing American assets, taking orders from Vlad and trying their best to destroy a great Nation

Yeah...Chelsea is a major problem to worry and whine about...right

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 01, 2017, 12:43:47 PM
Meanwhile we have Uday, Kusay, Ivanka and Jared assisting Dad Saddam in stealing American assets, taking orders from Vlad and trying their best to destroy a great Nation

Yeah...Chelsea is a major problem to worry and whine about...right

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

But she's a Clinton! I mean, that's pretty much the worst possible thing ever.

Nevermind that she's never given any indication of any desire to run for public office, and has almost always steered away conversations of a political career.

But like you said, let the Trump family continue setting up backroom deals with Russia. Nothing to see here unless one of the insufferable Clinton women open their mouths!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 01, 2017, 12:48:16 PM
Hillary/Chelsea 2020
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 01, 2017, 01:20:08 PM
But she's a Clinton! I mean, that's pretty much the worst possible thing ever.

Nevermind that she's never given any indication of any desire to run for public office, and has almost always steered away conversations of a political career.

But like you said, let the Trump family continue setting up backroom deals with Russia. Nothing to see here unless one of the insufferable Clinton women open their mouths!

So just to clarify you actually found any value in the OP? Hahaha. AHAHAH. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

Anyway, there's this way where you can predict future behavior by seeing how people are currently behaving. For example, when the child of a former president starts going to great lengths by way of a huge media tour upping public profile, a book release with a title with political overtones and aligning oneself to countless causes both on the internet and at events, a reasonable person could probably deduce that they might be taking a shot at public office.

I know though, I'm like the only one speculating about this.

Hillary/Chelsea 2020

Those freaking hens on The View. Unbelievable.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 01:23:51 PM
Trumps an ignorant freaking moron. But you guys with your conspiracy theorist excrement just hurt your cause.

If you wanna make a strong argument against Trump he's a stubborn ignorant fragile egomaniac. Nobody can argue that, and ira a huge issue. When you start rambling and rumbling about Russia and Jared Ivanka you just come off like a crazy who should be ignored.

Trump 100% is a problem. The other stuff is largely unsubstantiated
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 01, 2017, 01:30:57 PM
Those freaking hens on The View. Unbelievable.

TIL that MJ and SFD watch The View.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on June 01, 2017, 01:57:38 PM
You have to respect mj2's commitment to his craft: posting multiple paragraphs at a time of ill-informed, immature crap that no one wants to read.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 01, 2017, 02:28:28 PM
TIL that MJ and SFD watch The View.

Yeah, no, I just have an intelligence level equivalent to a host on the view.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 01, 2017, 02:28:43 PM
The outrage over the Paris Agreement is so dumb. If people were to actually read the damn thing they'll see it's just a bunch of vague nonsense and totally unbinding, and just forces certain countries (doesn't even say which) to provide funds (doesn't say how much) and each country gets one vote on what happens. What's to stop every country from voting that the U.S should foot the entire bill? Nothing. What would happen if we refuse? Nothing. It's just more UN PR bullshit. We don't need that excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on June 01, 2017, 02:35:03 PM
Then why pull out if it's so inconsequential?

It's at least a show of good faith that the United States is serious about combating climate change.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 02:38:15 PM
The outrage over the Paris Agreement is so dumb. If people were to actually read the damn thing they'll see it's just a bunch of vague nonsense and totally unbinding, and just forces certain countries (doesn't even say which) to provide funds (doesn't say how much) and each country gets one vote on what happens. What's to stop every country from voting that the U.S should foot the entire bill? Nothing. What would happen if we refuse? Nothing. It's just more UN PR bullshit. We don't need that excrement.

If the United States gave a excrement about global warming it should make its OWN bill and standards for us to follow. And then expand upon it globally. I know you'll get excrement for your comments because it's you saying them, but you're completely correct. It's an extremely vague bill with no specifications and no accountability.

Hell look what happened with Trump and Nato the other day. He basically called out other countries for not sticking to their agreements on defense spending. And he pretty much got criticized for it like it's somehow his fault.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 02:47:09 PM
Then why pull out if it's so inconsequential?

Because he didn't agree to it, another US president did. I totally agree that global warming is real and a problem and needs to be dealt with. But this bill is complete excrement and is symbolic more than anything. I don't think that's the reason Trumps pulling out at all, I think he's just being an anti environmental pro fossil fuel ignoramus. But I think it happens to be the right thing to do
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 01, 2017, 02:50:09 PM
Then why pull out if it's so inconsequential?

It's at least a show of good faith that the United States is serious about combating climate change.

Better to pull out now than to wait until they all vote on some bullshit measures that negatively affect the U.S. We'll obviously pull out then, but why even bother in the first place? Better to say "this bill sucks and we want no part in it." The bill doesn't even establish standards. It just says "The signors pledge to lower emissions." Oh what a great treaty.

It's all manufactured outrage.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on June 01, 2017, 02:53:08 PM
http://www.businessinsider.com/companies-dont-want-trump-cancel-paris-agreement-google-apple-exxon-2017-6

These companies all disagree with you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 02:54:49 PM
These are the white houses talking points on why we pulled out

Paris Accord – TALKERS
Topline: The Paris Accord is a BAD deal for Americans, and the President’s action today is
keeping his campaign promise to put American workers first. The Accord was negotiated poorly
by the Obama Administration and signed out of desperation. It frontloads costs on the American
people to the detriment of our economy and job growth while extracting meaningless
commitments from the world’s top global emitters, like China. The U.S. is already leading the
world in energy production and doesn’t need a bad deal that will harm American workers.
UNDERMINES U.S. Competitiveness and Jobs
 According to a study by NERA Consulting, meeting the Obama Administration’s
requirements in the Paris Accord would cost the U.S. economy nearly $3 trillion over
the next several decades.
 By 2040, our economy would lose 6.5 million industrial sector jobs – including 3.1
million manufacturing sector jobs
 It would effectively decapitate our coal industry, which now supplies about one-third
of our electric power
The deal was negotiated BADLY, and extracts meaningless commitments from the
world’s top polluters
 The Obama-negotiated Accord imposes unrealistic targets on the U.S. for reducing our
carbon emissions, while giving countries like China a free pass for years to come.
 Under the Accord, China will actually increase emissions until 2030
The U.S. is ALREADY a Clean Energy and Oil & Gas Energy Leader; we can reduce
our emissions and continue to produce American energy without the Paris Accord
 America has already reduced its carbon-dioxide emissions dramatically.
 Since 2006, CO2 emissions have declined by 12 percent, and are expected to continue to
decline.
 According to the Energy Information Administration (EIA), the U.S. is the leader in oil
& gas production.
The agreement funds a UN Climate Slush Fund underwritten by American taxpayers
 President Obama committed $3 billion to the Green Climate Fund - which is about 30
percent of the initial funding – without authorization from Congress
 With $20 trillion in debt, the U.S. taxpayers should not be paying to subsidize other
countries’ energy needs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on June 01, 2017, 02:55:38 PM
Trump's own Secretary of State was opposed to pulling out of the accord.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 01, 2017, 02:56:01 PM
If the United States gave a excrement about global warming it should make its OWN bill and standards for us to follow. And then expand upon it globally. I know you'll get excrement for your comments because it's you saying them, but you're completely correct. It's an extremely vague bill with no specifications and no accountability.

Hell look what happened with Trump and Nato the other day. He basically called out other countries for not sticking to their agreements on defense spending. And he pretty much got criticized for it like it's somehow his fault.

The thing is that the government really doesn't need to get involved. Companies here already invests billions in hydro, geothermal, and nuclear. Just because wind turbines look cool it doesn't mean they're the most effective renewable energy resource. The government gave out excrement loads of subsidies to renewable energy companies after Obama was elected (I know because I sold renewable energy research to a lot of companies that don't even exist anymore), and it didn't amount to much at all. In fact, the big oil companies that people hate are some of the largest investors in renewable and sustainable energy. Energy efficiency will save money in the long run once the technology is there. The government doesn't need to get involved, companies see where the future lies. The government didn't have to ban horse and carriages for the automobile to take over.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 01, 2017, 02:57:01 PM
For christ's sake, Trump's own Secretary of State disagrees with you.

And?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 01, 2017, 02:58:49 PM
Shocking that Tommy and DCM agree with staying out of the accord for absolutely no reason other than hurr durr. Shocking I tell you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 03:01:27 PM
The thing is that the government really doesn't need to get involved. Companies here already invests billions in hydro, geothermal, and nuclear. Just because wind turbines look cool it doesn't mean they're the most effective renewable energy resource. The government gave out excrement loads of subsidies to renewable energy companies after Obama was elected (I know because I sold renewable energy research to a lot of companies that don't even exist anymore), and it didn't amount to much at all. In fact, the big oil companies that people hate are some of the largest investors in renewable and sustainable energy. Energy efficiency will save money in the long run once the technology is there. The government doesn't need to get involved, companies see where the future lies. The government didn't have to ban horse and carriages for the automobile to take over.

If the government truly believes that global warming is a threat to the lives of everybody on the earth then of course they should get involved. How they get involved is certainly debatable. I'm all for the free market, but I could also understand a selfish mentality of "why should my company foot the bill, I can be selfish and everybody else will take care of it"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 03:04:03 PM
Shocking that Tommy and DCM agree with staying out of the accord for absolutely no reason other than hurr durr. Shocking I tell you.

Or maybe because there's no good reason to be in it? If something is vague bullshit with zero accountability then it serves no purpose. I'm not a global warming hysteric, but if we were going to get involved in some kind of global warming pact. I'd want specific things that need to be done, and specific actions that will hold people and nations  accountable if they don't comply.

Is that not reasonable? I'm pretty sure that even the hardcore global warming activists would agree with that

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on June 01, 2017, 03:06:04 PM
And?

And as the former CEO of the largest oil company in the world, his opposition to pulling out of an agreement to reduce gas emissions should be telling.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on June 01, 2017, 03:11:53 PM
The government didn't have to ban horse and carriages for the automobile to take over.

This is an absurd argument. Horse and carriages didn't represent a threat to our environment. The production of buggy whips didn't affect the quality of the air we breathe or the rise in sea levels.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 01, 2017, 03:40:55 PM
Or maybe because there's no good reason to be in it? If something is vague bullshit with zero accountability then it serves no purpose. I'm not a global warming hysteric, but if we were going to get involved in some kind of global warming pact. I'd want specific things that need to be done, and specific actions that will hold people and nations  accountable if they don't comply.

Is that not reasonable? I'm pretty sure that even the hardcore global warming activists would agree with that



Come to the tailgate so I can call you an unqualified idiot to your face, rather than bothering to type it out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 03:43:34 PM
Come to the tailgate so I can call you an unqualified idiot to your face, rather than bothering to type it out.

Fine ignore me attempting to make a point. But is specificity unreasonable for something of this magnitude?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on June 01, 2017, 03:52:22 PM
Because he didn't agree to it, another US president did. I totally agree that global warming is real and a problem and needs to be dealt with. But this bill is complete excrement and is symbolic more than anything. I don't think that's the reason Trumps pulling out at all, I think he's just being an anti environmental pro fossil fuel ignoramus. But I think it happens to be the right thing to do
So if your logic is...
1. Global warming is real.
2. Trump is being an anti-environmental, pro-fossil fuel ignoramus.
3. The bill is symbolic and really not that important.

...what's the point of leaving it? Because Obama, "another US president," agreed to it? That's clearly Trump's logic - if Obama agreed to it, I'm going to erase it because freak Obama. And if he's being an ignoramus...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 01, 2017, 03:55:29 PM
Trumps an ignorant freaking moron. But you guys with your conspiracy theorist excrement just hurt your cause.

If you wanna make a strong argument against Trump he's a stubborn ignorant fragile egomaniac. Nobody can argue that, and ira a huge issue. When you start rambling and rumbling about Russia and Jared Ivanka you just come off like a crazy who should be ignored.

Trump 100% is a problem. The other stuff is largely unsubstantiated

Jared is being investigated for attempting to set up a backchannel network directly to the Kremlin inside the Russian embassy. That's not conspiracy theorist bullshit, that's an actual investigation being carried out by US intelligence.

I guess we'll see what Comey has to say next week. Honestly, I wouldn't be the least bit shocked if we find out Trump had zero knowledge of any Russian collusion and it was all Kushner and Bannon.

Because he didn't agree to it, another US president did. I totally agree that global warming is real and a problem and needs to be dealt with. But this bill is complete excrement and is symbolic more than anything. I don't think that's the reason Trumps pulling out at all, I think he's just being an anti environmental pro fossil fuel ignoramus. But I think it happens to be the right thing to do

You admit you know he's doing this solely because he's a climate-change-denying ignoramus, but it's okay because you think the accord is inconsequential?

The president literally had the gall to whine that his son was upset that the image of his father's decapitated head was on the internet, yet he doesn't give a damn that he's paving the way to making the weather completely unpredictable in that same child's lifetime.

Twenty-two United States Senators pushed Trump to leave the accord, even against the advice of his own administration. I'm sure it's just me being a conspiracy theorist thinking the motivation wasn't "China can't be held to anything under this BS agreement."

BTW, China has actually reduced their emissions more than expected under the accord. But whatever. The president said this deal doesn't make America great again, so let's get rid of it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 03:56:42 PM
So if your logic is...
1. Global warming is real.
2. Trump is being an anti-environmental, pro-fossil fuel ignoramus.
3. The bill is symbolic and really not that important.

...what's the point of leaving it? Because Obama, "another US president," agreed to it? That's clearly Trump's logic - if Obama agreed to it, I'm going to erase it because freak Obama. And if he's being an ignoramus...

The bill isn't good.

Can anybody honestly say that it's reasonable to be a part of a vague bill that completely lacks specific actions and consequences? Or should we want something more concrete
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 01, 2017, 04:05:13 PM
The bill isn't good.

Can anybody honestly say that it's reasonable to be a part of a vague bill that completely lacks specific actions and consequences? Or should we want something more concrete

If Trump was saying "You know what, this bill is inconsequential, let's meet and hash out something better" there'd be a lot less to say.

He pulled out of the accord--that has demonstratively been working--and insists that global warming isn't real.

This is after being pushed by 22 United States Senators and against the will of his own cabinet and prominent US business leaders.

But please, keep defending him for doing the "right" thing for the "wrong" reasons.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 01, 2017, 04:17:41 PM
If Trump was saying "You know what, this bill is inconsequential, let's meet and hash out something better" there'd be a lot less to say.

He pulled out of the accord--that has demonstratively been working--and insists that global warming isn't real.

This is after being pushed by 22 United States Senators and against the will of his own cabinet and prominent US business leaders.

But please, keep defending him for doing the "right" thing for the "wrong" reasons.

I saved you the trouble earlier..........

Come to the tailgate so I can call you an unqualified idiot to your face, rather than bothering to type it out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on June 01, 2017, 04:18:56 PM
The bill isn't good.

Can anybody honestly say that it's reasonable to be a part of a vague bill that completely lacks specific actions and consequences? Or should we want something more concrete
Sure, something more concrete might be better. That's pretty much why Nicaragua did not agree to the deal - they wanted more sanctions on countries who didn't follow the rules that closely.

I'd be fine if Trump was working to make a more concrete deal. But that's not the case. The guy who said climate change is a hoax and surrounded himself with climate change deniers is not going to do that.

The point of the Paris accord is basically to get every nation on the same page that global warming is bad, climate change is happening, and we should try to work together to prevent the temperature from climbing 1.5 degrees Celsius. Was it largely symbolic? Sure, but why leave it? Why not work to make it better?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 01, 2017, 04:19:22 PM
The bill isn't good.

Can anybody honestly say that it's reasonable to be a part of a vague bill that completely lacks specific actions and consequences? Or should we want something more concrete

I think it's funny that Tommy peddled some reductive bullshit about how it's just an exercise in other countries taking money from the US and you jumped on with even less understanding of the aims, intent and process of the Paris Accord. (And stop calling it a bill. Bills form laws, this is a multipartite agreement.)

Go and educate yourself a little about what the Paris Accord is, what it does and doesn't do, and then come back and tell me why you think it's bad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 01, 2017, 04:21:04 PM
You have to respect mj2's commitment to his craft: posting multiple paragraphs at a time of ill-informed, immature crap that no one wants to read.

Ahahaha, and you're a fountain of intelligence. By the way, anytime you want to refute anything I have to say, it'll be the first. See now, ill-informed would be continually pounding the drum of Russia, bitching about Kushner setting up a back channel to the Russians because WAPO said so. The very same publication that has done nothing but rely on anonymous sources with no corroboration, the very same publication that STILL employs Millbank and Capehart despite it being proven that they're both compromised due to their relationship and communication with the DNC. How many stories is Josh Rogin going to be forced to retract this year?

Just for clarification by the way, I do enjoy how everyone is worried about Kushner setting up said back channel (which has yet to be proven, as there are reports the RUSSIANS requested it in order to discuss a one off conversation about Syria), when A. this is the normal course of business between super-powers since the days of RFK, and B. Our last glorious leader set up backchannels with Iran as a private citizen.

Since I'm not one to fail to live up to expectations of immaturity, eat excrement doofus.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 01, 2017, 04:26:26 PM
Ahahaha,
Since I'm not one to fail to live up to expectations of immaturity, eat excrement doofus.



This is an acceptable post for this site.....I deleted all the unnecessary excrement. lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 01, 2017, 04:27:15 PM
I think it's funny that Tommy peddled some reductive bullshit about how it's just an exercise in other countries taking money from the US and you jumped on with even less understanding of the aims, intent and process of the Paris Accord. (And stop calling it a bill. Bills form laws, this is a multipartite agreement.)

Go and educate yourself a little about what the Paris Accord is, what it does and doesn't do, and then come back and tell me why you think it's bad.

When has that stopped him from interjecting, ever?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 04:30:52 PM
I think it's funny that Tommy peddled some reductive bullshit about how it's just an exercise in other countries taking money from the US and you jumped on with even less understanding of the aims, intent and process of the Paris Accord. (And stop calling it a bill. Bills form laws, this is a multipartite agreement.)

Go and educate yourself a little about what the Paris Accord is, what it does and doesn't do, and then come back and tell me why you think it's bad.

I know you're a fan of this site

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-paris-climate-agreement-would-be-a-great-first-step-if-this-were-1995/amp/

It doesn't directly agree with me, but makes the same point that it's vague and not concrete in a round about way
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 01, 2017, 04:32:51 PM
I think it's funny that Tommy peddled some reductive bullshit about how it's just an exercise in other countries taking money from the US and you jumped on with even less understanding of the aims, intent and process of the Paris Accord. (And stop calling it a bill. Bills form laws, this is a multipartite agreement.)

Go and educate yourself a little about what the Paris Accord is, what it does and doesn't do, and then come back and tell me why you think it's bad.

So its a treaty!

Well, then good riddance, it wasn't ratified correctly to begin with.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 01, 2017, 04:32:52 PM
Dude. Don't just post the first link Google gives you. Read about the agreement, and tell me what you think rather than just parroting your hero Tommy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on June 01, 2017, 04:35:33 PM
I know you're a fan of this site

https://www.google.com/amp/s/fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-paris-climate-agreement-would-be-a-great-first-step-if-this-were-1995/amp/

It doesn't directly agree with me, but makes the same point that it's vague and not concrete in a round about way
I don't disagree with that, but Trump isn't leaving the agreement to make it better. He doesn't earn the benefit of the doubt.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 01, 2017, 04:37:06 PM
So its a treaty!

Well, then good riddance, it wasn't ratified correctly to begin with.

Because Obama bypassed the Senate to ratify it, or because there are still a number of other countries yet to ratify?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 04:40:40 PM
Dude. Don't just post the first link Google gives you. Read about the agreement, and tell me what you think rather than just parroting your hero Tommy.
.

It's not but it says exactly that. It's vague, unrealistic, and it's basically saying let's meet every 5 years and talk about how we can do better.

I don't like the idea of the United States entering a vague agreement with a plethora of other nations and then ending up footing the bill subsidizing the global war on climate change disproportionately.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 01, 2017, 04:41:31 PM
then ending up footing the bill subsidizing the global war on climate change disproportionately.

Explain why you think that the Paris Agreement can make this happen.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 04:42:44 PM
This sums it up pretty well

As ambitious as this sounds, the agreement contains no binding rules on how to meet this (or any) temperature goal.  1 All greenhouse gas emission targets are voluntary and left to individual countries to determine. This choose-your-own-emissions strategy skirts the political problems that disarmed the Kyoto Protocol, but it may have also rendered the Paris agreement too weak to prevent widespread climate catastrophe. The pledges submitted thus far leave a scary gap between what’s needed and what countries aspire to do.

The numbers show that until nations implement more stringent emission controls, the 1.5 and 2 degree targets are nothing more than wishful thinking. “It’s just bullshit for them to say: ‘We’ll have a 2C warming target and then try to do a little better every five years,’ ” climate scientist James Hansen told the Guardian. “It’s just worthless words. There is no action, just promises. As long as fossil fuels appear to be the cheapest fuels out there, they will be continued to be burned.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 04:48:35 PM
Explain why you think that the Paris Agreement can make this happen.

Well for one the United States along with other wealthy countries pledges over 100 billion by 2020 to other nations to combat climate change. You damn well know who would be paying more of that than everybody else

And China and India wouldn't have to even start decreasing their carbon footprint until 2030 putting them at an economic advantage over the United States.

If you want a an international carbon tax which outlines the %s and criteria for every nation to make clean energy more cost effective and competitive I'm OK with that as a means to combat global warming.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 01, 2017, 04:48:49 PM
Because Obama bypassed the Senate to ratify it, or because there are still a number of other countries yet to ratify?

Indeed, this. Todays action is a pretty good example of what happens when that ratification doesn't occur, executive orders can be undone just as easily as they're created.

I'm not debating ANYTHING substantive here, I'm just saying when you don't adhere to the rules in which we've adopted for the acceptance of multinational agreements, they're upheld by pillars of sand.  If we don't have faith in our resolve towards an agreement and they can be undone so easily, how can we expect our partners in that agreement to give it full faith?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 01, 2017, 04:49:40 PM
This sums it up pretty well

As ambitious as this sounds, the agreement contains no binding rules on how to meet this (or any) temperature goal.  1 All greenhouse gas emission targets are voluntary and left to individual countries to determine. This choose-your-own-emissions strategy skirts the political problems that disarmed the Kyoto Protocol, but it may have also rendered the Paris agreement too weak to prevent widespread climate catastrophe. The pledges submitted thus far leave a scary gap between what’s needed and what countries aspire to do.

The numbers show that until nations implement more stringent emission controls, the 1.5 and 2 degree targets are nothing more than wishful thinking. “It’s just bullshit for them to say: ‘We’ll have a 2C warming target and then try to do a little better every five years,’ ” climate scientist James Hansen told the Guardian. “It’s just worthless words. There is no action, just promises. As long as fossil fuels appear to be the cheapest fuels out there, they will be continued to be burned.”

Yes. Lifting sections from an article and quoting them is so much more powerful a tool than just posting the link.

And quoting Hansen is funny. He's about as radical a climate scientist as you can find, the guys who persuaded Trump to withdraw from the Accord are about as far opposed to him as it's possible to be. The argument that "Paris doesn't go far enough so we should drop out of it" is utterly stupid in the context of international diplomacy and negotiation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 01, 2017, 04:54:16 PM
Indeed, this. Todays action is a pretty good example of what happens when that ratification doesn't occur, executive orders can be undone just as easily as they're created.

I'm not debating ANYTHING substantive here, I'm just saying when you don't adhere to the rules in which we've adopted for the acceptance of multinational agreements, they're upheld by pillars of sand.  If we don't have faith in our resolve towards an agreement and they can be done so easily, how can we expect our partners in that agreement to give it full faith?


That's fair. I think on this particular issue it's a rock and a hard place - the Senate wouldn't have ratifed for utterly egregious reasons, so Obama had the choice of doing the right thing the wrong way, or doing the wrong thing the right way. I agree though that without the support of law it can be very hard to maintain a position regardless of its rectitude, especially when the next guy up is a populist moron with the emotional maturity of a spoiled nine year old.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 04:56:28 PM
Yes. Lifting sections from an article and quoting them is so much more powerful a tool than just posting the link.

And quoting Hansen is funny. He's about as radical a climate scientist as you can find, the guys who persuaded Trump to withdraw from the Accord are about as far opposed to him as it's possible to be. The argument that "Paris doesn't go far enough so we should drop out of it" is utterly stupid in the context of international diplomacy and negotiation.

Let's simplify this argument drastically, because I know im not  versed in the art of being a climate warrior like some others.

Should any plan to combat climate change outline specifically what metrics countries need to improve upon, and what type of punishments will be dished out if they're not met. As well as specifically how it will be funded, and what will happen when other parties are not paying their part
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 01, 2017, 04:57:02 PM
Well for one the United States along with other wealthy countries pledges over 100 billion by 2020 to other nations to combat climate change. You damn well know who would be paying more of that than everybody else

You're looking at this like some kind of global social welfare scam. It isn't.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 01, 2017, 04:58:23 PM
Let's simplify this argument drastically, because I know im not  versed in the art of being a climate warrior like some others.

Should any plan to combat climate change outline specifically what metrics countries need to improve upon, and what type of punishments will be dished out if they're not met. As well as specifically how it will be funded, and what will happen when other parties are not paying their part

That's solid thinking and I agree, but pulling out of the foundational agreement that would enable that to happen is an entirely regressive move. We can talk more on this later but right now I have to make dinner and walk the dogs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 05:02:17 PM
That's solid thinking and I agree, but pulling out of the foundational agreement that would enable that to happen is an entirely regressive move. We can talk more on this later but right now I have to make dinner and walk the dogs.

By not pulling out you lose all leverage to improve the process. By the United States arguably the most important country for something like this pulling out it forces everybody to the negotiating table.

And while I'm pessimistic that Trump is sincere he did say he would like to renegotiate it, while the EU countries threw a excrement fit

Quote
"So we're getting out," Trump said, "but we will start to negotiate, and we will see if we can make a deal that's fair. And if we can that's great, and if we can't that's fine."
The governments of Germany, Italy and France — the three largest economies in the European Union — immediately threw out that idea. They released a joint statement Thursday saying they "firmly believe" that the accord can't be renegotiated, Reuters reported.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 01, 2017, 05:14:52 PM
moron with the emotional maturity of a spoiled nine year old.

No no, Hillary lost. She's back from her stroll in the woods ready to lead The Resistance now (send money) like Princess Leia while simultaneously going on unsolicited rants which outline exactly how the Russians prevented her from making any campaign appearances in Wisconsin or something. On one hand, its a lot of fun seeing the mental gymnastics one has to do to rationalize the fact that they lost the Presidency to the host of The Apprentice, but its also sort of pathetic.

I was going to keep the populist part of the quote up, but she's not a populist and despite disagreeing with the grand majority of Bernie's policy positions, what can I say I genuinely like the guy.

In reference to that quote from the leadership of Germany, Italy and France DCM posted...I mean lets cut the excrement. Whether they firmly believe it can be re-negotiated or not, they're still going to come to the table to try, and they know it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 01, 2017, 05:45:24 PM
This is an absurd argument. Horse and carriages didn't represent a threat to our environment. The production of buggy whips didn't affect the quality of the air we breathe or the rise in sea levels.

Okay you should probably read up on sanitary conditions in the 19th century. Horse excrement all over the streets etc. But that was a tangible issue at the time. Global warming isn't. It doesn't affect our daily lives now, and we don't even know if reducing emissions will even stop the warming trend. It's more of a "meh, better to try something than nothing." I'd rather us spend the money working on ways to adapt to warmer temperatures rather than spend trillions in the hope that it reverses its trend.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 01, 2017, 05:48:03 PM
That's solid thinking and I agree, but pulling out of the foundational agreement that would enable that to happen is an entirely regressive move. We can talk more on this later but right now I have to make dinner and walk the dogs.

But it's not a foundation agreement. It gives every country one vote. That's like giving every state one electoral vote in a general election. The less populous and rural states will win every time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on June 01, 2017, 06:24:18 PM
Okay you should probably read up on sanitary conditions in the 19th century. Horse excrement all over the streets etc.

It's honestly laughable (and a little sad) that you're comparing the environmental impact of horse manure to that of global warming, but you're the expert in horseshit.

But that was a tangible issue at the time. Global warming isn't.

You should probably read up on the tangible effects of climate change since you're under the impression that there aren't any (here's a link to NASA's climate change website: https://climate.nasa.gov/effects/).

It doesn't affect our daily lives now,

It does affect our daily lives. The most obvious example being the growing frequency of extreme weather activity, including droughts, heat waves, and floods (you can read about that here: http://nca2014.globalchange.gov/highlights/report-findings/extreme-weather).

we don't even know if reducing emissions will even stop the warming trend.

The mainstream scientific community would tell you that this is not accurate. Reducing the amount of greenhouse gas emissions would more than likely slow the trend of rising global temperatures, if not reverse it.

It's more of a "meh, better to try something than nothing."

No, it's more like a "let's be proactive in order to avoid a global catastrophe that would threaten the future of our species" sort of thing.

I'd rather us spend the money working on ways to adapt to warmer temperatures rather than spend trillions in the hope that it reverses its trend.

I'd rather that you take the time to understand a subject before shooting your mouth off about it but we can't all have what we want.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 01, 2017, 06:48:04 PM
They should have just renamed it The Trump Accords and we wouldn't be having this problem.   
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 01, 2017, 06:50:51 PM
But it's not a foundation agreement. It gives every country one vote. That's like giving every state one electoral vote in a general election. The less populous and rural states will win every time.

It's very clear that you don't understand how an international treaty works, and in particular haven't paid really any attention to the intents, aims and tools of the Paris Agreement.

You really are in love with victimhood politics, aren't you? If it's not illegal immigrants taking your jobs then it's poor countries taking your money.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 01, 2017, 06:53:25 PM
I'd rather us spend the money working on ways to adapt to warmer temperatures rather than spend trillions in the hope that it reverses its trend.

Wut?

Dude, we're looking at what will likely be the most significant extinction event since the Cretaceous Period.  It's not a matter of turning up the AC.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 01, 2017, 06:55:22 PM
Wut?

Dude, we're looking at what will likely be the most significant extinction event since the Cretaceous Period.  It's not a matter of turning up the AC.

LOLOLOLOLOLOL I had completely missed that freaking beauty. Wow.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on June 01, 2017, 06:59:51 PM
Tommy's thinking about the shorts weather twelve months out of the year.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 01, 2017, 07:30:56 PM
Sort of related, I did get my A/C unit serviced today, so I'm set for a year of climate change.  freak you Mother Nature!  Just this year though. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 08:18:26 PM
Also the whole idea that the United States would have different rules applied to it than countries like China and India is ridiculous.

Of course people are going to mock the USA for not being a leader while China is "stepping up" China is getting the best deal of anybody. They basically get to run wild and become an even stronger force in the global economy while other nations (the USA) are hobbled by these increased standards.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 01, 2017, 08:19:46 PM
And a very long and seemingly pretty thorough article which I didn't read in its entirety

http://www.politico.com/story/2017/05/31/trump-paris-climate-deal-what-it-means-238991

But mentions how under the agreement that China and India could continue to increase their emissions until 2030, while other countries would be expected to have more immediate results.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 01, 2017, 08:40:23 PM
They should have just renamed it The Trump Accords and we wouldn't be having this problem.   

Let's acknowledge most of Trumpland disliked it because it has Paris in the name.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 01, 2017, 09:32:20 PM
Let's acknowledge most of Trumpland disliked it because it has Paris in the name.

Does it count that Trump singlehandedly stormed the beaches of Normandy and saved all of Western Europe even France?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 01, 2017, 10:21:27 PM
Does it count that Trump singlehandedly stormed the beaches of Normandy and saved all of Western Europe even France?

Eventually all you plebs will come to understand that Trump eats the sun and drinks the sky and they both go with him when he dies.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 01, 2017, 10:42:20 PM
Eventually all you plebs will come to understand that Trump eats the sun and drinks the sky and they both go with him when he dies.



Trump has to be the new Chuck Norris.

Trump doesn't sleep, he waits.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 02, 2017, 12:34:07 AM
If the United States gave a excrement about global warming it should make its OWN bill and standards for us to follow. And then expand upon it globally. I know you'll get excrement for your comments because it's you saying them, but you're completely correct. It's an extremely vague bill with no specifications and no accountability.

Hell look what happened with Trump and Nato the other day. He basically called out other countries for not sticking to their agreements on defense spending. And he pretty much got criticized for it like it's somehow his fault.
For fucks sake man, Obama tried for 8 years and the reoublicans wouldn't even bring it up for discussion in congress.  What does the air smell like in your bubble.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 02, 2017, 12:36:03 AM
Because he didn't agree to it, another US president did. I totally agree that global warming is real and a problem and needs to be dealt with. But this bill is complete excrement and is symbolic more than anything. I don't think that's the reason Trumps pulling out at all, I think he's just being an anti environmental pro fossil fuel ignoramus. But I think it happens to be the right thing to do
So, Trump sided with Assad, who was sort of preoccupied.  The craziest thing is that Nicaragua didn't sign on because it didn't go far enough.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 02, 2017, 12:43:12 AM
Fine ignore me attempting to make a point. But is specificity unreasonable for something of this magnitude?
You admit to doing zero research, then make these stupid freaking arguments.

It is maddening.

This treaty is non binding.  It is a good will jesture by almost every single country in the world.

Trump pulling out completely fucks our international standing, creates no jobs, and has the potential to completely compromise our environment.

What the freak is wrong with your brain?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 02, 2017, 12:59:54 AM
That last reply was about 30 posts before the end.

I honestly cannot believe, full grown, at least one of them, educated men, not understanding that you have to start somewhere.  If you deny human interaction is destroying the climate, there was some imbreding in your past.

Trump did this, against everyone's advice, for his uneducated base to get a win.

I hope Barron is literaly desolved by the air his grandfather leaves him.

What the freak does Trump care about the environment?  His dimentia riddled derriere will be sucking jello through a straw by 2020.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on June 02, 2017, 04:45:48 AM
It isn't a bill. It is an international treaty that all but two (now three backwards, halfwit countries with authoritarian Nazi schmucks in power (Nicaragua, Syria and the Trumpdick USA Confefe Banana Republic) agreed to as a start to trying to deal with the climate change overheating of the planet through fossil fuels conflagration.

Only Trump, the Grab our hoo-ha Party, Tommyanne and dcm are happy in their brain dead bubble

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 02, 2017, 05:05:56 AM


Trump doesn't sleep, he tweets.

FTFY
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 02, 2017, 06:17:37 AM
You guys are fuckn insufferable. Stop with the political talking points and overreactions. Renewable energy in the U.S is a multi billion dollar industry and generation has been steadily growing for years, and there is zero reason why that's going to change just because we're withdrawing for the Paris Deal

Here's the latest (March '17) DOE Monthly Report on Renewables:
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec10.pdf

This isn't a Red/Blue thing. Texas actually leads the pack as far as Wind Energy generation goes, and it's not even close. Hydro is dominant because that's the most efficient. We're also improving our Nuclear Energy efficiency and generation.

Basically we're doing fine. We don't need the UN to tell us what to do. Each state has their own targets, and so does the US Govt. The DOE hasn't changed its position regarding it even after Trump's been elected. I have no idea where you jackasses are getting the idea that Trump and Republicans want to destroy the industry and ruin the environment and world.

So you don't continue to sound like idiots, READ THE FUCKN DATA. It's right there. The data is available, but you halfwits continue to let some snot nosed blogger or reporter do the research for you and regurgitate their biased and sensationalist bullshit directly into your throats.

Enough of this nonsense. If you want to argue, list some sources and actual raw data. I don't want to see links to articles. You have access to the same data that those reporters do.

So, please, I'm begging you. Enough of this "No Paris Agreement = End of the World" nonsense.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on June 02, 2017, 06:33:49 AM
Looks like executive Tommy's honey moon period at the new job wore off.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 02, 2017, 07:07:03 AM
Looks like executive Tommy's honey moon period at the new job wore off.

Ha. Nah, I've been working until 12am and waking up at 6am. Gonna be that way until I hire an account manager for Asia.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on June 02, 2017, 08:23:40 AM
Ha. Nah, I've been working until 12am and waking up at 6am. Gonna be that way until I hire an account manager for Asia.

Oh, so it's the lack of sleep making you crabby haha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Laxin on June 02, 2017, 08:31:59 AM
You guys are fuckn insufferable. Stop with the political talking points and overreactions. Renewable energy in the U.S is a multi billion dollar industry and generation has been steadily growing for years, and there is zero reason why that's going to change just because we're withdrawing for the Paris Deal

Here's the latest (March '17) DOE Monthly Report on Renewables:
https://www.eia.gov/totalenergy/data/monthly/pdf/sec10.pdf

This isn't a Red/Blue thing. Texas actually leads the pack as far as Wind Energy generation goes, and it's not even close. Hydro is dominant because that's the most efficient. We're also improving our Nuclear Energy efficiency and generation.

Basically we're doing fine. We don't need the UN to tell us what to do. Each state has their own targets, and so does the US Govt. The DOE hasn't changed its position regarding it even after Trump's been elected. I have no idea where you jackasses are getting the idea that Trump and Republicans want to destroy the industry and ruin the environment and world.

So you don't continue to sound like idiots, READ THE FUCKN DATA. It's right there. The data is available, but you halfwits continue to let some snot nosed blogger or reporter do the research for you and regurgitate their biased and sensationalist bullshit directly into your throats.

Enough of this nonsense. If you want to argue, list some sources and actual raw data. I don't want to see links to articles. You have access to the same data that those reporters do.

So, please, I'm begging you. Enough of this "No Paris Agreement = End of the World" nonsense.

I don't think anyone here is saying that Trump withdrawing the U.S. from the agreement means the end of the world.

Looking at that data you posted, if you project through 2030 assuming the linear rate renewable energy has been increasing in the past 5-10 years, along with nuclear power, its not enough to come close to the goal of a 26-28% decrease by 2030. Yes, the 26-28% reduction in emissions was a lofty goal set by Obama, but I don't think its far fetched to think that our best chance at reaching that would be together as a nation, rather than independent factions at the state/local level, academia level or business level.

I also am not entirely convinced that the same progression will be made in the next 4 years as Trump has put climate change critics in control of related departments (see EERE, EPA), will likely be decreasing funding for this field and is a proponent of the dying coal industry.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 02, 2017, 09:28:49 AM
What this really comes down to...

Western foreign leaders think Trump is a circus clown.  The only play in Trump's playbook is to be a bully.  He can't bully them, because they would just point and laugh, so he does this move to bully the UN.

What does he accomplish?

A smoke and mirrors 'win' for his base.

It will not create jobs.  Coal jobs were lost due to automation, not regulations.  Lifting regulations will only mean increased profits, at the expense of the environment.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on June 02, 2017, 09:34:51 AM
Tommy and his idol are both convinced that they both know better than the vast majority of the world. They're both in for a rude awakening.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on June 02, 2017, 09:47:00 AM
How does Russia tie into this?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 02, 2017, 10:46:09 AM
I'm not going to defend any of this stuff Trump does.  I'm both clueless and trying my best not to judge.

I will say that Trump is sneakily slow playing the electoral college for 2020.  How many issues has he "coincidentally" sided with the views of people that reside in swing states, especially the ones he won in 2016?  It's a smart strategy politically.  There are many states that are set in stone every year as Democrat or Republican.  No point in worrying about New York or Massachusetts wants and needs strictly from a political standpoint.  He'll never win that state. 

He is basically pandering to those swing states now, taking the constituents' sides in those states and giving them what they want.  It's quite likely why he has a boner for coal country.  You constantly hear him talking about Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, etc.  It's no coincidence.  Regardless of who hates him, how much he pisses off Democrats, etc., as long as he keeps giving the people in those swing states what they want, he'll be hard to beat in 2020 assuming he isn't dead or arrested.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 11:01:31 AM
Tommy and his idol are both convinced that they both know better than the vast majority of the world. They're both in for a rude awakening.

Completely ignoring global warming for a second if you looked at the winners and losers of this accord, the United States is clearly the biggest loser while China and India are the biggest winners.

Of course the majority of the world is going to disagree with this. Obama agreed to shitty terms to appease the EU.

If people want to combat global warming fine, but do it in a way where we're not licking the boot of the EU agreeing to excrement that nobody else will comply with.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 02, 2017, 11:03:35 AM


I'm not going to defend any of this stuff Trump does.  I'm both clueless and trying my best not to judge.

I will say that Trump is sneakily slow playing the electoral college for 2020.  How many issues has he "coincidentally" sided with the views of people that reside in swing states, especially the ones he won in 2016?  It's a smart strategy politically.  There are many states that are set in stone every year as Democrat or Republican.  No point in worrying about New York or Massachusetts wants and needs strictly from a political standpoint.  He'll never win that state. 

He is basically pandering to those swing states now, taking the constituents' sides in those states and giving them what they want.  It's quite likely why he has a boner for coal country.  You constantly hear him talking about Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan, etc.  It's no coincidence.  Regardless of who hates him, how much he pisses off Democrats, etc., as long as he keeps giving the people in those swing states what they want, he'll be hard to beat in 2020 assuming he isn't dead or arrested.

It doesn't matter.  If they pass a health care bill or tax reform, the voters in those states are screwed.

Black lung is a pre existing condition.  The coal jobs are not coming back.

Trump, on a daily basis, is bending the lower and middle class folks that voted for him over.

To even consider Trump is slow playing anything would imply he's not an idiot.  At this stage of his life, he is an idiot.  He's the exact opposite of slow play.

What has he given the people in the swing states exactly?

I'm doing whatever I can to take away your healthcare.  I'm doing everything I can to make your air and water poisonous.  Oh, and you still don't get a job.

The pendulum is going to swing hard and fast.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 02, 2017, 11:04:29 AM
Completely ignoring global warming for a second if you looked at the winners and losers of this accord, the United States is clearly the biggest loser while China and India are the biggest winners.

Of course the majority of the world is going to disagree with this. Obama agreed to shitty terms to appease the EU.

If people want to combat global warming fine, but do it in a way where we're not licking the boot of the EU agreeing to excrement that nobody else will comply with.
Please explain the shitty terms, in your own words.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 02, 2017, 11:18:44 AM

It doesn't matter.  If they pass a health care bill or tax reform, the voters in those states are screwed.

Black lung is a pre existing condition.  The coal jobs are not coming back.

Trump, on a daily basis, is bending the lower and middle class folks that voted for him over.

To even consider Trump is slow playing anything would imply he's not an idiot.  At this stage of his life, he is an idiot.  He's the exact opposite of slow play.

What has he given the people in the swing states exactly?

I'm doing whatever I can to take away your healthcare.  I'm doing everything I can to make your air and water poisonous.  Oh, and you still don't get a job.

The pendulum is going to swing hard and fast.
When I say Trump, I mean his campaign.

He doesn't have to make swing state voters better off.  He just has to make them think they are.  I think you are underestimating how fervent Trump voters are. Many of them could find a way to justify anything he does.  This country is a big place, and there are parts that are truly different worlds from the rest- that goes for both sides.  Someone in Mississippi likely wouldn't have any frame of reference regarding how someone in Connecticut thinks.

I'm not saying he will win again, I'm just saying he's trying to set the stage.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 11:19:02 AM
Please explain the shitty terms, in your own words.

China is the biggest polluter in the world. Under this agreement China can increase there emissions all they want until 2030, then they're supposed to start decreasing them thereafter. However there's absolutely nothing to hold them accountable to that, so they can just do whatever they want. Same thing with India

Hell under this agreement absolutely nobody can be held to anything. But the United States being the United States would at least to attempt to do their part, while most of the other countries do whatever the freak they want.

If it was a concrete agreement with specifications that's a whole different game. But this has different standards for different parties, with no concrete anything
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 11:23:04 AM
China is the biggest polluter in the world.

Not true. Canada is, followed by the US. China isn't even close to being the biggest offender.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on June 02, 2017, 11:25:42 AM
Completely ignoring global warming for a second if you looked at the winners and losers of this accord, the United States is clearly the biggest loser while China and India are the biggest winners.

Of course the majority of the world is going to disagree with this. Obama agreed to shitty terms to appease the EU.

If people want to combat global warming fine, but do it in a way where we're not licking the boot of the EU agreeing to excrement that nobody else will comply with.
There you go again as Ronald Reagan once said.

Questions

Do you hate President Obama because he was a black man?

Do you hate all non white people too?



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 11:25:51 AM
Not true. Canada is, followed by the US. China isn't even close to being the biggest offender.

Maybe per capita

But in terms of co2 output China makes up 29% of the world's co2 output, with united states second around 14%
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 11:26:27 AM
There you go again as Ronald Reagan once said.

Questions

Do you hate President Obama because he was a black man?

Do you hate all non white people too?



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



I hate you because you're still alive
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 11:29:36 AM
Maybe per capita

But in terms of co2 output China makes up 29% of the world's co2 output, with united states second around 14%

Absolute numbers are a ridiculous way of assessing things. Per capita is the only logical measure.

If I run a company with 5000 staff and make $50M a year in profit, and you run a company with 250 staff and make $25M a year in profit, who's running the more efficient and profitable company?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 02, 2017, 11:29:43 AM
Not true. Canada is, followed by the US. China isn't even close to being the biggest offender.
Everything I've read says China is worst, followed by US.  Not sure if it cumulative or just currently.

Edit: NVM, see what you're saying.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 11:30:18 AM
Everything I've read says China is worst, followed by US.  Not sure if it cumulative or just currently. 

Stop reading stupid sources then. Look at the numbers for yourself.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 02, 2017, 11:32:20 AM
Stop reading stupid sources then. Look at the numbers for yourself.
Not reading stupid sources, it's reported different ways.  I understand what you are saying about per capita.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 11:33:17 AM
Not reading stupid sources, it's reported different ways.  I understand what you are saying about per capita.


If your sources are saying that China is the world's biggest polluter because of absolute numbers, then they're stupid sources because they're clearly promoting an agenda.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 11:34:17 AM
Absolute numbers are a ridiculous way of assessing things. Per capita is the only logical measure.

If I run a company with 5000 staff and make $50M a year in profit, and you run a company with 250 staff and make $25M a year in profit, who's running the more efficient and profitable company?

If combating climate change was your #1 priority which will do more to achieve that goal.

Does it make sense to ignore the nation responsible for 30% of the entire world's Co2 emissions for 13 years while focusing on small countries per capita? Yes Canada and Saudi Arabia are terrible per capita, but significant improvements to them would get completely overshadowed by the increase from China.

Under this deal it wouldn't be unrealistic for China to make up over 50% of the world's Co2 emissions by 2030

Obviously everybody needs to do their part I don't disagree, but China is by far the biggest, and their growth is only going to make time worse and worse
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 02, 2017, 11:35:34 AM
If your sources are saying that China is the world's biggest polluter because of absolute numbers, then they're stupid sources because they're clearly promoting an agenda.
I don't think CNN is promoting an agenda for Trump, but I agree they are often a stupid source. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 11:37:39 AM
If combating climate change was your #1 priority which will do more to achieve that goal.

Does it make sense to ignore the nation responsible for 30% of the entire world's Co2 emissions for 13 years while focusing on small countries per capita?

Obviously everybody needs to do their part I don't disagree, but China is by far the biggest, and their growth is only going to make time worse and worse


No one is saying that China doesn't have to improve, including China, but your argument against the worth of the Paris Agreement is bullshit. It's a foundational agreement which everyone used to say "we're all in this together, and we all need to do our part, and this is a starting point", and yesterday Trump just said "freak you, I'm not doing my part because I need to win votes by fooling miners in Pennsylvania that they're getting their jobs back".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 11:38:22 AM
I don't think CNN is promoting an agenda for Trump, but I agree they are often a stupid source. 

If that's what CNN are saying then they are. Simple math doesn't lie.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 11:42:04 AM
No one is saying that China doesn't have to improve, including China, but your argument against the worth of the Paris Agreement is bullshit. It's a foundational agreement which everyone used to say "we're all in this together, and we all need to do our part, and this is a starting point", and yesterday Trump just said "freak you, I'm not doing my part because I need to win votes by fooling miners in Pennsylvania that they're getting their jobs back".

Trump said nothing about not doing our part. He said this deal is excrement and disproportionately benefits China and India while having absolutely nothing concrete in writing.

At the absolutely MINIMUM there needs to be serious concrete requirements and punishments for both China and India baked into the deal to ensure that they will more than adequately contribute in 2030 after getting a 13 year free pass.  From both a fairness perspective, as well as ensuring that global warming gets addressed.  China benefits by having an economic advantage for 13 years, and India benefits by having their clean energy subsidized by the rest of the world

Because without China and India going above and beyond the battle against global warming is completely lost.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 11:45:15 AM
Trump said nothing about not doing our part. He said this deal is excrement and disproportionately benefits China and India while having absolutely nothing concrete in writing.

Then Trump, like you, fundamentally misunderstands how the Agreement works.

Quote
At the absolutely MINIMUM there needs to be serious concrete requirements and punishments for both China and India baked into the deal to ensure that they will more than adequately contribute in 2030 after getting a 13 year free pass.  From both a fairness perspective, as well as ensuring that global warming gets addressed.

Because without China and India going above and beyond the battle against global warming is completely lost.

There also then would need to be the same serious concrete requirements and punishments for the US, so there's no way he's ever going to the table to negotiate this because he would have to enact swingeing changes to US environmental legislation and the corporate landscape, and so far he has done the exact opposite.

Yesterday had absolutely nothing to do with India or China and everything to do with Trump, Pruitt and the rest of the shitheads that he has surrounded himself with.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 11:51:42 AM
Then Trump, like you, fundamentally misunderstands how the Agreement works.

There also then would need to be the same serious concrete requirements and punishments for the US, so there's no way he's ever going to the table to negotiate this because he would have to enact swingeing changes to US environmental legislation and the corporate landscape, and so far he has done the exact opposite.

Yesterday had absolutely nothing to do with India or China and everything to do with Trump, Pruitt and the rest of the shitheads that he has surrounded himself with.

I'm not talking about Trump, I'm talking about the deal.

And yes there's two assumptions one could make that nations will attempt to follow the rules of deal or they won't. If they won't it's worthless and does nothing anyway so we should ignore that assumption.

If countries are following the rules and China and India could grow anyway they want for 13 years it gives them an economic advantage over the rest of the world, as they're able to utilize the cheapest sources of energy regardless of Co2 emissions (while other nations need to keep them in mind)

And since China and India are getting these advantages given to them because that's how the deal was made they should have to pay a price. That price should be accountability after their 13 year grace period.

The United States shouldn't need to have these punishments too, because we're not being awarded with a special 13 year grace period like China and India. We will be expected to immediately comply with the standards, not to mention we obviously will probably be the number one financer of clean energy in other countries like India because that's how this excrement always works.

I don't see how that's unreasonable. The deal was made to cater to them, they should at least be forced to do their part
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on June 02, 2017, 12:01:45 PM
I hate you because you're still alive
The question was not about me. It was about your obvious racist hatred of President Barack Obama, the last legitimate President of the United States before it became a controlled colony of the Russian Federation in 2017

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 12:03:57 PM
The question was not about me. It was about your obvious racist hatred of President Barack Obama, the last legitimate President of the United States before it became a controlled colony of the Russian Federation in 2017

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



Mod edit - let's try and keep at least a pretence of civilized discourse
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 12:06:48 PM
I'm not talking about Trump, I'm talking about the deal.

And yes there's two assumptions one could make that nations will attempt to follow the rules of deal or they won't. If they won't it's worthless and does nothing anyway so we should ignore that assumption.

If countries are following the rules and China and India could grow anyway they want for 13 years it gives them an economic advantage over the rest of the world, as they're able to utilize the cheapest sources of energy regardless of Co2 emissions (while other nations need to keep them in mind)

And since China and India are getting these advantages given to them because that's how the deal was made they should have to pay a price. That price should be accountability after their 13 year grace period.

The United States shouldn't need to have these punishments too, because we're not being awarded with a special 13 year grace period like China and India. We will be expected to immediately comply with the standards, not to mention we obviously will probably be the number one financer of clean energy in other countries like India because that's how this excrement always works.

I don't see how that's unreasonable. The deal was made to cater to them, they should at least be forced to do their part

It's a good faith agreement, signed on a voluntary basis by almost every country in the world given the importance to everyone of making sure that there continues to be a planet for us to live on. There's no sensible reason to think that China and India aren't fully committed to doing their part.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 12:08:42 PM
And why do you keep saying that China and India don't have to do anything until 2030? I don't see that in the Agreement. Are you just parroting Tommy again?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 12:09:30 PM
It's a good faith agreement, signed on a voluntary basis by almost every country in the world given the importance to everyone of making sure that there continues to be a planet for us to live on. There's no sensible reason to think that China and India aren't fully committed to doing their part.

People and nations have always done what's in their individual best interests. I think it's completely naieve to assume every nation is fully committed to doing their part, especially when it comes down to money which it absolutely will. If nations are gifted special conditions like China and India its completely reasonable to expect that to come at a cost
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 12:10:40 PM
People and nations have always done what's in their individual best interests. I think it's completely naieve to assume every nation is fully committed to doing their part, especially when it comes down to money which it absolutely will. If nations are gifted special conditions like China and India its completely reasonable to expect that to come at a cost

What special conditions are you talking about?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 02, 2017, 12:13:26 PM
China is the biggest polluter in the world. Under this agreement China can increase there emissions all they want until 2030, then they're supposed to start decreasing them thereafter. However there's absolutely nothing to hold them accountable to that, so they can just do whatever they want. Same thing with India

Hell under this agreement absolutely nobody can be held to anything. But the United States being the United States would at least to attempt to do their part, while most of the other countries do whatever the freak they want.

If it was a concrete agreement with specifications that's a whole different game. But this has different standards for different parties, with no concrete anything

Will you stop with this already?

I've posted it a few times already and not called you out directly on it, but China has demonstratively reduced their emissions already. What they "can" do isn't what they're actually doing.

You're making a hypothetical argument in direct contrast to reality to support your point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Laxin on June 02, 2017, 12:14:01 PM
China is the biggest polluter in the world. Under this agreement China can increase there emissions all they want until 2030, then they're supposed to start decreasing them thereafter. However there's absolutely nothing to hold them accountable to that, so they can just do whatever they want. Same thing with India

Hell under this agreement absolutely nobody can be held to anything. But the United States being the United States would at least to attempt to do their part, while most of the other countries do whatever the freak they want.

If it was a concrete agreement with specifications that's a whole different game. But this has different standards for different parties, with no concrete anything

China amounts for the most emissions, but on a per capita basis, the U.S. is far an away the biggest offender. China and India do not have any specific deadlines until 2030, but they have set a goal to reach at 2030. Meaning, they have to make strides to reach that goal in the meantime. They can't just keep increasing emissions with no regard, then 2029 rolls around and meet their goal. China pledged to have a 20% increase in non-fossil fuel use, which cannot happen overnight, as well as reduce carbon reliance by 60-65% from 2005 numbers. India has pledged to reduce emissions by 2030 by 33-35%. Once again, this cannot happen overnight and must (and will) be something that have to start working towards now.

... As of now, China and India have both started to work towards their goals, and are apparently ahead of projected schedule.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 12:15:57 PM
What special conditions are you talking about?

They are designated as developing nations, so they're not held to the same standards as say the united states
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 12:22:06 PM
They are designated as developing nations, so they're not held to the same standards as say the united states

Yeah, you don't have a clue what you're talking about. The Kyoto Protocol placed binding commitments on Annex 1 countries. Paris doesn't do that, at all. It requires each country to submit a Nationally Determined Contribution, which is their own individual plan to deliver upon the mutual aims of the Agreement, and progress of each is reviewed in 2023.

You're parroting someone else and making yourself look a bit silly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 12:22:47 PM
And maybe I misunderstood the way the China 2030 thing was presented, so I could totally be wrong on that.

But the way Obama forced the United States wasn't right either, as an agreement like this should be done with due diligence.

I personally still don't like the fact that there is nothing concrete with zero accountability built into the whole thing. And climate warriors should feel the same way, because if you don't have clear rules  odds are you won't be successful.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 12:24:06 PM
Yeah, you don't have a clue what you're talking about. The Kyoto Protocol placed binding commitments on Annex 1 countries. Paris doesn't do that, at all. It requires each country to submit a Nationally Determined Contribution, which is their own individual plan to deliver upon the mutual aims of the Agreement, and progress of each is reviewed in 2023.

You're parroting someone else and making yourself look a bit silly.

Laxin mentioned it above in more details how China and India have no deadlines until 2030
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 12:25:59 PM
Laxin mentioned it above in more details how China and India have no deadlines until 2030

Show me where that is.

https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/convention/application/pdf/english_paris_agreement.pdf
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 02, 2017, 12:28:16 PM
I love how everyone is arguing with DCM as if he has a well researched defensible opinion. Has he ever had that here?


Like maybe once when Heismanberg called him a bundle of sticks and they made dinner plans.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 12:29:13 PM
I love how everyone is arguing with DCM as if he has a well researched defensible opinion. Has he ever had that here?


Like maybe once when Heismanberg called him a bundle of sticks and they made dinner plans.

It was breakfast plans

OK thanks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 12:33:41 PM
Show me where that is.

https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/convention/application/pdf/english_paris_agreement.pdf

In order to achieve the long-term temperature goal set out in Article 2,
Parties aim to reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as
possible, recognizing that peaking will take longer for developing country Parties,
and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter in accordance with best available
science, so as to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources
and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century, on the
basis of equity, and in the context of sustainable development and efforts to
eradicate poverty.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 12:38:46 PM
In order to achieve the long-term temperature goal set out in Article 2,
Parties aim to reach global peaking of greenhouse gas emissions as soon as
possible, recognizing that peaking will take longer for developing country Parties,
and to undertake rapid reductions thereafter in accordance with best available
science, so as to achieve a balance between anthropogenic emissions by sources
and removals by sinks of greenhouse gases in the second half of this century, on the
basis of equity, and in the context of sustainable development and efforts to
eradicate poverty.

Curious how you extrapolated that into "China and India have no deadlines until 2030". (Also, I don't know why you keep talking about India given they produce considerably less than half the absolute emissions of the US despite having around 4 times the population - their per capita emissions are approximately 12% of the US number.)

We - and by that I mean the US and Canada - are by a massive distance the world's worst offenders, despite being two of the world's most advanced nations. Your attempt at blame shifting to excuse yesterday's action is absolutely ridiculous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 02, 2017, 12:47:12 PM
It isn't a bill. It is an international treaty that all but two (now three backwards, halfwit countries with authoritarian Nazi schmucks in power (Nicaragua, Syria and the Trumpdick USA Confefe Banana Republic) agreed to as a start to trying to deal with the climate change overheating of the planet through fossil fuels conflagration.

Only Trump, the Grab our hoo-ha Party, Tommyanne and dcm are happy in their brain dead bubble

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

You're so freaking dumb you validated my point. Thanks?

Once again for those that need a civics lesson, if it was a treaty, it was never properly passed and is void. At the very least JohnnyE offered an explanation as to how he felt a congressional bypass was ok in this instance, but at the same time, live by the executive order die by the executive order.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on June 02, 2017, 01:34:15 PM
Well you should be happy now that Pres Dumb$hit unilaterally voided our participation. Enjoy choking and hacking on Trump-caused poisonous water and fumes. You deserve it

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on June 02, 2017, 01:40:21 PM
The political threads may need to be moved to the Fight Club forum
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on June 02, 2017, 01:41:16 PM
http://www.politicususa.com/2017/06/01/cool-obama-returned-annihilated-trump-leaving-paris-climate-accord.html

Sad to have to remember way back to 2016 when the US was blessed with a SANE President

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 02, 2017, 01:49:51 PM
Not true. Canada is, followed by the US. China isn't even close to being the biggest offender.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170602/144aa9c19722ce2a59eb2cf2e105feeb.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 02, 2017, 01:51:01 PM
Curious how you extrapolated that into "China and India have no deadlines until 2030". (Also, I don't know why you keep talking about India given they produce considerably less than half the absolute emissions of the US despite having around 4 times the population - their per capita emissions are approximately 12% of the US number.)

We - and by that I mean the US and Canada - are by a massive distance the world's worst offenders, despite being two of the world's most advanced nations. Your attempt at blame shifting to excuse yesterday's action is absolutely ridiculous.

Biggest offenders based on what exactly?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 01:52:50 PM
Biggest offenders based on what exactly?

Per capita stats, which as I already explained are far more relevant than absolute numbers.

(http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/uploads/per_capita_emissions.png)

https://wri.org/blog/2014/11/6-graphs-explain-world%E2%80%99s-top-10-emitters
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 02, 2017, 01:53:47 PM
Will you stop with this already?

I've posted it a few times already and not called you out directly on it, but China has demonstratively reduced their emissions already. What they "can" do isn't what they're actually doing.

You're making a hypothetical argument in direct contrast to reality to support your point.

I wouldn't trust any statistic released by the Chinese government. When I lived in HK we got maybe 2 days of sunshine a week and the rest was fog coming from the north.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 02, 2017, 01:56:13 PM
Show me where that is.

https://unfccc.int/files/essential_background/convention/application/pdf/english_paris_agreement.pdf

I think the individual countries' NDC's aren't listed in the document you posted.  I think they are listed elsewhere.  I found this.

https://www.c2es.org/docUploads/chinas-contributions-paris-climate-agreement.pdf

Either way, as mentioned before, China can't just have a CO2 party until 2029 and magically stop polluting in 2030.  In order to do that they have to gradually work toward the goal over many years, and it will be pretty damn obvious if they aren't trying.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 02, 2017, 01:57:16 PM
Per capita stats, which as I already explained are far more relevant than absolute numbers.

(http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/uploads/per_capita_emissions.png)

https://wri.org/blog/2014/11/6-graphs-explain-world%E2%80%99s-top-10-emitters

Is the majority of the Canadian pollution by chance coming from Winnipeg? 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 02, 2017, 01:57:44 PM
Per capita stats, which as I already explained are far more relevant than absolute numbers.

(http://www.wri.org/sites/default/files/uploads/per_capita_emissions.png)

https://wri.org/blog/2014/11/6-graphs-explain-world%E2%80%99s-top-10-emitters

We're talking about total emissions that are believed to be causing warming. Even if Canada reduced its emissions by half it wouldn't make much of a difference in the world's stage. That's like saying Sweden is richer than the U.S because their per capital GDP is higher.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 02:00:17 PM
We're talking about total emissions that are believed to be causing warming. Even if Canada reduced its emissions by half it wouldn't make much of a difference in the world's stage. That's like saying Sweden is richer than the U.S because their per capital GDP is higher.

That's a ridiculous argument (and in fairness you already blew any credibility you might have had in this discussion yesterday with "I'd rather figure out how to live in a warmer world than do anything about stopping happening"), and I've already explained why.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 02, 2017, 02:03:37 PM
That's a ridiculous argument (and in fairness you already blew any credibility you might have had in this discussion yesterday with "I'd rather figure out how to live in a warmer world than do anything about stopping happening"), and I've already explained why.

Why is it ridiculous? China's emissions are nearly 20 times that of Canada's and You're calling Canada the biggest offender?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 02:08:05 PM
Why is it ridiculous? China's emissions are nearly 20 times that of Canada's and You're calling Canada the biggest offender?

Because if the US and Canada were polluting at the same rate as China, global emissions would be significantly reduced. The only sensible metric is to determine how much pollution we can afford per person on the planet, not per arbitrarily defined national boundary, and work to achieve that number. China should be allowed to produce four times as much pollution as the US, because it has four time as many people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 02, 2017, 02:09:48 PM
Because if the US and Canada were polluting at the same rate as China, global emissions would be significantly reduced. The only sensible metric is to determine how much pollution we can afford per person on the planet, not per arbitrarily defined national boundary, and work to achieve that number. China should be allowed to produce four times as much pollution as the US, because it has four time as many people.

But China's entire country hasn't industrialized yet. Canada is pretty much capped, so is the U.S, so their emissions can only go down, especially with the rate of investment in energy efficiency and renewables.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 02:15:43 PM
But China's entire country hasn't industrialized yet. Canada is pretty much capped, so is the U.S, so their emissions can only go down, especially with the rate of investment in energy efficiency and renewables.

That's the other side of this. If China industrializes and starts polluting at comparable rates to the USA and Canada, global co2 emissions would close to double

Regardless of people's opinions on this accord, it leaves many opportunities for improvement from both a person on the left and person on the rights perspective
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2017, 02:16:55 PM
But China's entire country hasn't industrialized yet. Canada is pretty much capped, so is the U.S, so their emissions can only go down, especially with the rate of investment in energy efficiency and renewables.

Cool. We don't want China to increase, and we want the US and Canada to decrease. So we all got together and sat round a table, along with all of the other nations on Earth, and agreed that, and agreed that we'd all take responsibility for our own issues, and we'd all create plans to fix them, and we'd all do what we could to help each other out with fixing our problems because we recognised we're all in this together.

And then the freaking idiot that you put in charge said "nah, freak that because Pruitt says it doesn't matter and I made a bunch of bullshit promises to win a few thousand votes".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 02:21:55 PM
It's also worth pointing out that Trumps pulling out won't even go into effect for several years, meaning there's either plenty of time for him to renegotiate or for the opposition to get their point across and elect somebody who will suddenly opt us back in when they replace Trump in the Whitehouse


And say what you want about Trump but him pulling the United States out (which largely means nothing) has done a tremendous job getting climate change as the biggest issue in the media and discussions, which will probably benefit the war on climate change more than this bill ever would have
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 02, 2017, 04:20:10 PM
China and India will be leaps and bounds ahead of us in 4 years when it comes to renewable energy.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 04:33:32 PM
China and India will be leaps and bounds ahead of us in 4 years when it comes to renewable energy.



Considering that the rest of the world will be paying for Indias clean energy that's incredibly unlikely (assuming that's true, and not some shitbheing poorly represented by conservative media) . Not to mention the whole world will likely be very similar when it comes to technology. Once renewable energy becomes more cost efficient than other energy more people will adapt it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 02, 2017, 05:00:43 PM
Considering that the rest of the world will be paying for Indias clean energy that's incredibly unlikely (assuming that's true, and not some shitbheing poorly represented by conservative media) . Not to mention the whole world will likely be very similar when it comes to technology. Once renewable energy becomes more cost efficient than other energy more people will adapt it
When has excrement not been poorly represented by conservative media?

Why do you keep saying other countries are going to pay for it?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 05:06:23 PM
When has excrement not been poorly represented by conservative media?

Why do you keep saying other countries are going to pay for it?

Because that's in the agreement

Article 9
1. Developed country Parties shall provide financial resources to assist
developing country Parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in
continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention.
2. Other Parties are encouraged to provide or continue to provide such support
voluntarily.
3. As part of a global effort, developed country Parties should continue to take
the lead in mobilizing climate finance from a wide variety of sources, instruments
and channels, noting the significant role of public funds, through a variety of
actions, including supporting country-driven strategies, and taking into account the
needs and priorities of developing country Parties. Such mobilization of climate
finance should represent a progression beyond previous efforts.
4. The provision of scaled-up financial resources should aim to achieve a
balance between adaptation and mitigation, taking into account country-driven
strategies, and the priorities and needs of developing country Parties, especially
those that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change and
have significant capacity constraints, such as the least developed countries and
small island developing States, considering the need for public and grant-based
resources for adaptation.
5. Developed country Parties shall biennially communicate indicative
quantitative and qualitative information related to paragraphs 1 and 3 of this
Article, as applicable, including, as available, projected levels of public financial
resources to be provided to developing country Parties. Other Parties providing
resources are encouraged to communicate biennially such information on a
voluntary basis.
6. The global stocktake referred to in Article 14 shall take into account the
relevant information provided by developed country Parties and/or Agreement
bodies on efforts related to climate finance.


7. Developed country Parties shall provide transparent and consistent
information on support for developing country Parties provided and mobilized
through public interventions biennially in accordance with the modalities,
procedures and guidelines to be adopted by the Conference of the Parties serving as
the meeting of the Parties to this Agreement, at its first session, as stipulated in
Article 13, paragraph 13. Other Parties are encouraged to do so.
8. The Financial Mechanism of the Convention, including its operating entities,
shall serve as the financial mechanism of this Agreement.
9. The institutions serving this Agreement, including the operating entities of
the Financial Mechanism of the Convention, shall aim to ensure efficient access to
financial resources through simplified approval procedures and enhanced readiness
support for developing country Parties, in particular for the least developed
countries and small island developing States, in the context of their national
climate strategies and plans.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 02, 2017, 05:37:37 PM
In the end, if Trump doesn't get re-elected in 2020, this may not matter too much with regards to the Paris Accord itself.  From what I understand the agreement doesn't go into effect until around about the time of our election in 2020.  If he doesn't get re-elected, I'm quite positive the new president will be happy to hop right back on board with this agreement with little time lost.

The real issue is Trump bringing fossil fuels back to the forefront in an attempt to ratchet up our energy independence at the expense of the environment long-term.  This is the issue whether or not the US in a part of the Paris Accord.  Even if the US were a part of it still, I would not expect Donald Trump's administration to be too concerned with meeting any goals or paying anything into it at all seeing that it has no real force behind it.  So then it becomes a question of how much it matters just having the US name in the agreement.  Hell, the Paris Accord might be better off without this administration in it.  Having the Trump administration not meet goals and not give money as outlined would probably just discourage some other countries from trying as hard to stick to it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 02, 2017, 05:57:47 PM


Because that's in the agreement

Article 9
1. Developed country Parties shall provide financial resources to assist
developing country Parties with respect to both mitigation and adaptation in
continuation of their existing obligations under the Convention.
2. Other Parties are encouraged to provide or continue to provide such support
voluntarily.
3. As part of a global effort, developed country Parties should continue to take
the lead in mobilizing climate finance from a wide variety of sources, instruments
and channels, noting the significant role of public funds, through a variety of
actions, including supporting country-driven strategies, and taking into account the
needs and priorities of developing country Parties. Such mobilization of climate
finance should represent a progression beyond previous efforts.
4. The provision of scaled-up financial resources should aim to achieve a
balance between adaptation and mitigation, taking into account country-driven
strategies, and the priorities and needs of developing country Parties, especially
those that are particularly vulnerable to the adverse effects of climate change and
have significant capacity constraints, such as the least developed countries and
small island developing States, considering the need for public and grant-based
resources for adaptation.
5. Developed country Parties shall biennially communicate indicative
quantitative and qualitative information related to paragraphs 1 and 3 of this
Article, as applicable, including, as available, projected levels of public financial
resources to be provided to developing country Parties. Other Parties providing
resources are encouraged to communicate biennially such information on a
voluntary basis.
6. The global stocktake referred to in Article 14 shall take into account the
relevant information provided by developed country Parties and/or Agreement
bodies on efforts related to climate finance.


7. Developed country Parties shall provide transparent and consistent
information on support for developing country Parties provided and mobilized
through public interventions biennially in accordance with the modalities,
procedures and guidelines to be adopted by the Conference of the Parties serving as
the meeting of the Parties to this Agreement, at its first session, as stipulated in
Article 13, paragraph 13. Other Parties are encouraged to do so.
8. The Financial Mechanism of the Convention, including its operating entities,
shall serve as the financial mechanism of this Agreement.
9. The institutions serving this Agreement, including the operating entities of
the Financial Mechanism of the Convention, shall aim to ensure efficient access to
financial resources through simplified approval procedures and enhanced readiness
support for developing country Parties, in particular for the least developed
countries and small island developing States, in the context of their national
climate strategies and plans.

Well, yeah.  Volunteering to assist you with your pub tab, is a whole lot different that being forced to pay for your pub tab. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 02, 2017, 06:21:02 PM
I'm at the pub
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 07:20:45 PM

Well, yeah.  Volunteering to assist you with your pub tab, is a whole lot different that being forced to pay for your pub tab. 

How about agreeing to pay for some guy on the other side of the world to open up his own pub?

I'm not too keen on that
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 02, 2017, 08:04:37 PM
So was the Paris Accord an unenforceable meaningless agreement, or was it a terrible deal that was going to funnel millions of dollars from the US to pooper countries? Because the defenders of this move can't seem to get their story straight.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 02, 2017, 08:08:11 PM
So was the Paris Accord an unenforceable meaningless agreement, or was it a terrible deal that was going to funnel millions of dollars from the US to pooper countries? Because the defenders of this move can't seem to get their story straight.

You realize the exact same argument could be used against the people who are for it?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 02, 2017, 08:14:14 PM
You realize the exact same argument could be used against the people who are for it?

Not really. None of the people for it are arguing that it was meaningless.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 02, 2017, 08:18:18 PM
https://theintercept.com/2017/06/02/hillary-clinton-barack-obama-an-attractive-good-looking-man/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 03, 2017, 05:26:18 AM
How about agreeing to pay for some guy on the other side of the world to open up his own pub?

I'm not too keen on that
How about understanding the difference between 'voluntarily assist' and 'pay'?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 07, 2017, 11:57:53 AM
Kansas realized they fucked up.

http://www.npr.org/2017/06/07/531886684/the-kansas-tax-cut-experiment-comes-to-an-end-as-lawmakers-vote-to-raise-taxes?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20170607
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 07, 2017, 12:15:10 PM
Kansas realized they fucked up.

http://www.npr.org/2017/06/07/531886684/the-kansas-tax-cut-experiment-comes-to-an-end-as-lawmakers-vote-to-raise-taxes?utm_source=facebook.com&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=npr&utm_term=nprnews&utm_content=20170607

Wait...so...the government needs money to operate? And when you give businesses extra tax breaks they pocket the additional profit rather than reinvest it?

Sounds like fake news.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 09, 2017, 07:51:13 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-06-08/accused-leaker-is-indicted-for-disclosing-classified-report

Gurl you in trouble.

Quote
A federal prosecutor said in court that authorities had uncovered a series of “new and downright frightening" other acts by Winner, including inserting a thumb drive into her Air Force computer and taking classified information while she was still in the military.

“When you take a thumb drive in a top-secret computer as she did, we don’t know what happened to it," U.S. Magistrate Judge Brian Epps said at the hearing. “That falls into the landscape of danger to the community but it is also a danger to the nation."

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/prosecutors-alleged-nsa-leaker-wanted-to-burn-the-white-house-down/531327849

Quote
Based on evidence seized from her home, federal prosecutors detailed Winner's alleged plans to burn down the White House and travel to Afghanistan, pledging her allegiance to the Taliban.

Quote
Prosecutors said a phone call to her sister expressed Winner’s confidence in how to play the court during her bond hearing.

“I’m pretty, white and cute,” she allegedly told her sister. Prosecutors said Winner told her sister she would braid her hair and cry in court.

Prosecutors said she also instructed family members to transfer $30,000 into her mother’s account so she’d appear poor enough for a court-appointed attorney.

Hahaha.


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 09, 2017, 09:15:51 AM
https://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2017-06-08/accused-leaker-is-indicted-for-disclosing-classified-report

Gurl you in trouble.

http://www.wsbtv.com/news/local/prosecutors-alleged-nsa-leaker-wanted-to-burn-the-white-house-down/531327849

Hahaha.




That's right use your white privelege to get out of trouble. Because it damn sure isn't going to be because you're cute.

Love how people were saying she didn't do anything wrong a couple days ago. I saw the terms "whistleblower" and "national hero" get thrown around.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 09, 2017, 09:32:35 AM
That's right use your white privelege to get out of trouble. Because it damn sure isn't going to be because you're cute.

Love how people were saying she didn't do anything wrong a couple days ago. I saw the terms "whistleblower" and "national hero" get thrown around.
This is why I like to wait for more evidence.

If this true, holy excrement.  Bitch is crazy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 09, 2017, 09:32:35 AM
"Pretty, white and cute"? You're definitely white, sister.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 09, 2017, 09:36:41 AM
More at fault for this situation:


This dumb queynte?

Or her dumb queynte parents for naming her "Reality Winner"?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 09, 2017, 09:48:00 AM
More at fault for this situation:


This dumb queynte?

Or her dumb queynte parents for naming her "Reality Winner"?
Trump will pardon her for that name.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 10, 2017, 06:56:31 PM
"Rosie O'Donnell defended a woman charged with leaking U.S. government secrets, calling 25-year-old Reality Winner a "brave, young patriot."


O'Donnell tweeted Thursday, "i support reality winner speak truth to power #resist #womenUNITE" and added a link to a GoFundMe page to raise money for Winner.

She also defended Winner after a Twitter user said the 25-year-old got herself into trouble by being "careless."

"Brave not careless," O'Donnell responded.


She also confirmed on Twitter that she donated $1,000 to Winner.

Winner, a government contractor, remains locked up on federal charges that she mailed a classified report to an online news outlet. The Justice Department announced her arrest Monday as The Intercept reported that it had obtained a classified report suggesting Russian hackers attacked a U.S. voting software supplier days before last year's presidential election."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 10, 2017, 06:58:14 PM
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2017/06/09/accused-nsa-leaker-wrote-she-wanted-burn-white-house-down/102671348/

I still think her most serious offense is claiming she's cute
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 10, 2017, 07:06:12 PM
I feel like both sides have a hypocrisy on this. The right loves that Wikileaks dumped HRC's emails despite them hating Bradsea Manning a couple of years prior. The left is all over leaked classified communications about Russian hacking and election interference but mortally offended by the leaking of DNC emails.

Do we want unauthorised insight or not? Data doesn't have a side, or a preference. Data just is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 10, 2017, 07:12:07 PM
I feel like both sides have a hypocrisy on this. The right loves that Wikileaks dumped HRC's emails despite them hating Bradsea Manning a couple of years prior. The left is all over leaked classified communications about Russian hacking and election interference but mortally offended by the leaking of DNC emails.

Do we want unauthorised insight or not? Data doesn't have a side, or a preference. Data just is.

I'm not a fan of leakers one way or another. I do feel like there's a difference between a government employee with a top secret security clearance versus an outside organization like Wikileaks that we have no control over one way or another.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 10, 2017, 07:18:33 PM
I'm not a fan of leakers one way or another. I do feel like there's a difference between a government employee with a top secret security clearance versus an outside organization like Wikileaks that we have no control over one way or another.

Wikileaks are merely the vessel. If the information wasn't originating from sources with clearances it wouldn't be interesting in the first place. (Let's also note that HRC's emails weren't in fact classified and she committed no crime, as directly stated by the Director of the FBI.)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 12, 2017, 04:38:50 PM
I feel like both sides have a hypocrisy on this. The right loves that Wikileaks dumped HRC's emails despite them hating Bradsea Manning a couple of years prior. The left is all over leaked classified communications about Russian hacking and election interference but mortally offended by the leaking of DNC emails.

Do we want unauthorised insight or not? Data doesn't have a side, or a preference. Data just is.
I have slightly more sympathy for the cases where an insider leaks info than when a hacker steals it, but in general I'm pro-information when it comes to uncovering scum, so it's not a partisan issue for me. Therefore I wield moral superiority over both sides of this.
I'm not a fan of leakers one way or another. I do feel like there's a difference between a government employee with a top secret security clearance versus an outside organization like Wikileaks that we have no control over one way or another.

Not all leakers go through Wikileaks. Some give information to thoughtfully considered media outlets.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 20, 2017, 07:31:38 AM
The left is just as stupid as the right

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/20/jill-stein-green-party-no-regrets-2016-215281

Apparently there's some who think Jill Steins campaign was a scheme by the Russians to help Trump get elected
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on June 20, 2017, 09:30:30 AM
The left is just as stupid as the right

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/20/jill-stein-green-party-no-regrets-2016-215281

Apparently there's some who think Jill Steins campaign was a scheme by the Russians to help Trump get elected
Anyone who believes this type of excrement should literally be tested for down syndrome. This was the long con because she ran in freaking 2012
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 20, 2017, 06:20:45 PM
The left is just as stupid as the right

http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/06/20/jill-stein-green-party-no-regrets-2016-215281

Apparently there's some who think Jill Steins campaign was a scheme by the Russians to help Trump get elected

No actual leftists think this. Just Clinton apologists.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 20, 2017, 06:43:06 PM
No actual leftists think this. Just Clinton apologists.

So just the 68 million people that voted for her

Got it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 20, 2017, 07:46:17 PM
So just the 68 million people that voted for her

Got it

You don't know what an actual leftist is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 20, 2017, 07:49:56 PM
You don't know what an actual leftist is.

Yeah thank god it's just an actual leftist he doesn't know.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 23, 2017, 02:21:27 PM
So I have been mulling over the Senate version of 'healthcare' and I can only come to a single conclusion.

Republicans want to cull the herd.  They are not even trying to hide their intentions anymore.  Poor sick children and the elderly are nothing more than a drain on the system to them.  Infirm numbers, and nothing more.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 23, 2017, 02:37:33 PM
Republicans don't believe in God.  They use the concept to get votes from the desperate and weak minded, but not a single one of them promote the teachings of Christ.  In fact, they do everything in their power to achieve the polar opposite.

They believe in life if a person is rich, or a fetus.  The believe in liberty, if you are a straight white christian, and the persuit of happiness is only for those above the working class.

They will force a rape fetus to come to term, but don't want to help pay for the pregnancy, and don't want to provide food or medical care once it is post fetus.

They are fine with for profit incarceration based on the color of your skin and the size of your wallet.

They believe proper education is only for the wealthy.

They believe in keeping all the wealth and power at the very top.

Republicans are basically trying to turn us into victorian England.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on June 23, 2017, 03:52:15 PM
Even the Orange Jackass' beloved Rasmussen poll now shows his approval rating has fallen below that of Cancer and Hitler

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on June 23, 2017, 06:08:27 PM
Even the Orange Jackass' beloved Rasmussen poll now shows his approval rating has fallen below that of Cancer and Hitler

But still higher than Hillary.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 23, 2017, 10:36:58 PM
This is why politics is so fucked, BOTH sides are full of this ridiculous hate for each other which is why nothing ever gets done

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/caught-on-tape-dem-official-says-hes-glad-scalise-got-shot/ar-BBD5kFE

Some douchebag democrat official gets caught on tape saying hes glad that Republican guy got shot at the baseball game, and wishes he was dead
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 24, 2017, 06:03:22 AM
I tried to make some points, but whatever.

A progressive takes a dollar out of their wallet and is happy to buy a bag of chips.

A what the freak has become of republicans guy buys a bag of chips, cackles gleefully.  I get this bag of chips because I let that sick post fetus die.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 24, 2017, 07:02:49 AM
I tried to make some points, but whatever.

A progressive takes a dollar out of their wallet and is happy to buy a bag of chips.

A what the freak has become of republicans guy buys a bag of chips, cackles gleefully.  I get this bag of chips because I let that sick post fetus die.

lol dude you are off your rocker. Nobody replied to your points because they are overreaching and insane
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 24, 2017, 07:22:00 AM
lol dude you are off your rocker. Nobody replied to your points because they are overreaching and insane
Had an amazing chat with a guy from western Virginia last night.  We agreed to disagree on some things, but found common ground on most things.  Granted the drinks helped.  I told him to run in Virginia and I would run against Heller in Nevada.  He said freak that, I'll move to Nevada and vote for you (me).

Take one thing I said that was overreaching or insane.  Debate me bitch.  Or just hide behind your keyboard and pretend you don't see what's happening.

People like you put a government in place that exists only for their own self interest.  Tell me, show me, enlighten me to where I am wrong.  Grow a freaking pair and educate me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 24, 2017, 10:23:36 AM
Had an amazing chat with a guy from western Virginia last night.  We agreed to disagree on some things, but found common ground on most things.  Granted the drinks helped.  I told him to run in Virginia and I would run against Heller in Nevada.  He said freak that, I'll move to Nevada and vote for you (me).

Take one thing I said that was overreaching or insane.  Debate me bitch.  Or just hide behind your keyboard and pretend you don't see what's happening.

People like you put a government in place that exists only for their own self interest.  Tell me, show me, enlighten me to where I am wrong.  Grow a freaking pair and educate me.

"All republicans are evil and wrong, my opinion is right 100% of the time"
- You. Every. Post.

It's really not worth the discussion. I shouldn't have even commented on your post because it's like talking to a wall but the republicans buy chips to kill sick babies comment made me LOL.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 24, 2017, 10:32:07 AM
Debate me bitch.

I'm gonna save this one for the regular season.  Right up there with the warrior mud run thing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 24, 2017, 01:04:13 PM
"All republicans are evil and wrong, my opinion is right 100% of the time"
- You. Every. Post.

It's really not worth the discussion. I shouldn't have even commented on your post because it's like talking to a wall but the republicans buy chips to kill sick babies comment made me LOL.
I'm smart enough to know that I don't truly know excrement.  I asked you to refute 1 thing I said.  You're the one that insulted me when I just jotted some thoughts down.

You're like the senator that Hayes had on this week.  Praising the virtues of the death bill, until Hayes asked him...

Why are you cutting medicaid and giving the money to billionaires?  The bitch couldn't even speak.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 24, 2017, 01:17:51 PM
And I asked this really nice redneck, if democrats just threw 2 issues to the states, guns and abortion, and NEVER talked about them again at the federal level, where would he stand?

He said he wouldn't vote for Trump again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on June 24, 2017, 06:05:09 PM
This is why politics is so fucked, BOTH sides are full of this ridiculous hate for each other which is why nothing ever gets done

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/caught-on-tape-dem-official-says-hes-glad-scalise-got-shot/ar-BBD5kFE

Some douchebag democrat official gets caught on tape saying hes glad that Republican guy got shot at the baseball game, and wishes he was dead

i feel like every post you make in this thread is a 'you guys say republicans suck, but democrats suck too!' post

you're trying to feign objectivity but all you're doing is being a republican apologist. there are people like you in real life and you are the worst, most annoying type of people


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 24, 2017, 06:14:10 PM
i feel like every post you make in this thread is a 'you guys say republicans suck, but democrats suck too!' post

you're trying to feign objectivity but all you're doing is being a republican apologist. there are people like you in real life and you are the worst, most annoying type of people




I don't think the Republicans are good though. I think they're wrong on the majority of social issues, their forcing of religion to back their core beliefs and values is one of the most moronic things in all of American politics.

But ultimately I think the biggest issue is both sides can't see that they're wrong. Why can't someone admit that global warming is real and that clean energy is the future. But until clean energy becomes more cost efficient we should use both while promoting the development of clean stuff. 

Until both sides can realize they're freaking stubborn and wrong people will continue to debate the exact same excrement forever. What are they odds in 25 years politics will still be based around debating pro life vs choice, and the handful of the same idiotic freaking things.

I know I went into a tangent but all I want is political stances to be decided on a by the issue basis, rather than across party lines
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Laxin on June 24, 2017, 06:29:05 PM
But until clean energy becomes more cost efficient we should use both while promoting the development of clean stuff.

Who has said otherwise?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 24, 2017, 06:34:20 PM
Who has said otherwise?

People who think we should stop drilling for oil, or mining for coal etc etc.

As long as they are cost efficient we should continue to utilize them as long as the rest of the world still is (if the entire world agrees to stop using coal or oil or something that's a different story)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 24, 2017, 08:19:21 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/06/24/bernie-sanders-and-his-wife-reportedly-lawyer-up-amid-fbi-probe.html

Bernie was right the corrupt millionaires and billionaires are ruining this country.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 24, 2017, 11:38:27 PM
Lobbyists are scum.

https://theintercept.com/2017/06/23/democratic-lobbyists-donald-trump-mottur-podesta-comcast-prudential/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 24, 2017, 11:42:31 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/www.cnbc.com/amp/2017/06/24/bernie-sanders-and-his-wife-reportedly-lawyer-up-amid-fbi-probe.html

Bernie was right the corrupt millionaires and billionaires are ruining this country.

"Brady Toensing of Burlington, the man responsible for the claims filed to the U.S. attorney for Vermont, was a chairman for the Trump campaign in his state."

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/bernie-and-jane-sanders-under-fbi-investigation-for-bank-fraud-hire-lawyers/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 24, 2017, 11:47:58 PM
It's pretty easy DCM.  If Jesus was more than just a really cool hippy, and he were to come back tomorrow, would identify more with the republicans or democrats?  Rhetorical really, we all know the answer.

Both sides of the aisle take money from special interests.  Which side wants it to stop?  Another rhetorical.

Which side thought citizens united was a good idea?

Which side thinks $800 billion should go to ultra wealthy while your sick neighbor dies of the flu?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on June 25, 2017, 10:40:01 AM
Jesus was a pretty well-known socialist in his day.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 25, 2017, 10:55:38 AM
Jesus was a pretty well-known socialist in his day.
I don't know, I heard his disciples were ex-Goldman Sachs execs with golden parachutes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 25, 2017, 11:42:57 AM
Newsflash - American Expats enjoy living in developing countries:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/24/americas/mexico-american-expats/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 25, 2017, 12:13:17 PM
Newsflash - American Expats enjoy living in developing countries:

http://www.cnn.com/2017/06/24/americas/mexico-american-expats/index.html

Why are white people who leave America or the UK for a better standard of living called "expats" while brown people who move to America or the UK for a better standard of living called "immigrants"?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 25, 2017, 02:11:40 PM
Why are white people who leave America or the UK for a better standard of living called "expats" while brown people who move to America or the UK for a better standard of living called "immigrants"?

I don't know if you can call leaving the United States for Mexico a better standard of living.

But immigrants and expats have different definitions, although it is true race and socioeconomic status plays a role in their usage
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 25, 2017, 02:17:58 PM
I don't know if you can call leaving the United States for Mexico a better standard of living.

Did you read the article?

Quote
But immigrants and expats have different definitions, although it is true race and socioeconomic status plays a role in their usage

Do they? Explain the difference please.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 25, 2017, 02:23:33 PM
Did you read the article?

Do they? Explain the difference please.

They do

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, expatriate means someone “living in a foreign land,” while the definition of immigrant is “a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence.”

And everything in the article was anecdotal. I have no idea whether it is or isn't nice in thst city, but the article doesn't shed any light on that either
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 25, 2017, 02:33:04 PM
They do

According to the Merriam-Webster dictionary, expatriate means someone “living in a foreign land,” while the definition of immigrant is “a person who comes to a country to take up permanent residence.”

I think you're being a little selective with your use of M-W. Also, I've used emigrate rather than immigrate to ensure that we're looking at like for like:

Quote
Definition of expatriate

expatriated; expatriating
transitive verb
1
:  banish, exile
2
:  to withdraw (oneself) from residence in or allegiance to one's native country
intransitive verb
:  to leave one's native country to live elsewhere; also :  to renounce allegiance to one's native country

Quote
Definition of emigrate

emigrated; emigrating
intransitive verb
:  to leave one's place of residence or country to live elsewhere

So they're essentially the exact same word, which begs the question as to why would I, a white skinned English guy living in Canada, be considered an expat, while my doctor, a brown skinned Pakistani who has been here three times as long as I have, be considered an immigrant? If anything, expat should be the pejorative - after all, that suggests that I'm still affiliated with my country of birth, merely here to take advantage of the temporary home country, whereas an immigrant is fully committing to their new home.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on June 25, 2017, 03:42:35 PM
This is why politics is so fucked, BOTH sides are full of this ridiculous hate for each other which is why nothing ever gets done

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/caught-on-tape-dem-official-says-hes-glad-scalise-got-shot/ar-BBD5kFE

Some douchebag democrat official gets caught on tape saying hes glad that Republican guy got shot at the baseball game, and wishes he was dead
With all the respect you deserve...

Some schmuck Republican official who was fired for advocating the murder of Secretary Clinton in 2016 was invited to the WH and honored by the Orange Hitler

A little bit worse IMO than attacking Johnny Depp or Kathy Griffin or Shakespeare

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 25, 2017, 09:05:02 PM
With all the respect you deserve...

Some schmuck Republican official who was fired for advocating the murder of Secretary Clinton in 2016 was invited to the WH and honored by the Orange Hitler

A little bit worse IMO than attacking Johnny Depp or Kathy Griffin or Shakespeare

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



Im sure even somebody as stupid as you can realize that its wrong for a politician to say hes glad that another politician got shot and wishes he was dead less than a day after someone actually attempted to murder him and almost did.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on June 26, 2017, 03:20:25 AM
No dimwit

Not worse than your halfwit fake "President" honoring that piece of crap from NH in a ceremony inside the White House.

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on June 26, 2017, 05:15:41 AM
(http://southparkstudios.mtvnimages.com/images/shows/south-park/clip-thumbnails/season-5/0503/south-park-s05e03c09-cripple-fight-16x9.jpg?)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 26, 2017, 01:20:04 PM
Why are white people who leave America or the UK for a better standard of living called "expats" while brown people who move to America or the UK for a better standard of living called "immigrants"?

I don't understand why you make everything about race. If you move to a developed country from an underdeveloped country for purely economic reasons, with no real intention of moving back, then you're an immigrant. If you move to a country for cultural or job-transfer, etc, then you're an expat.

There are plenty of Japanese expats in NYC who move here to study, job transfers, getting a career in certain fields that aren't as readily accessible back home. I don't consider them immigrants.

Also, all those Polish immigrants who move to the UK to drive taxis or bus tables aren't expats. The white Eastern Europeans who move to Toronto for a better life aren't "expats". The white Frenchman who moves to the U.K because he'd rather work for a UK company is an expat.

Personal example: My parents moving to the U.S in 1978: immigrants; Me moving to HK in 2014: expat.

Everything is black/white for you. That's an immature way of viewing the world, and you of all people should know better.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 26, 2017, 01:40:28 PM
The people in the article you linked showed absolutely no intention of returning, and economics were certainly part of the moving process (note the comments about affordability of healthcare etc). Why are they expats and not immigrants?

Let me put it to you another way: you say that 'the white Eastern Europeans who move to Toronto for a better life aren't "expats"', but as a white Western European who moved to Toronto for a better life why am I referred to as one when they aren't? (I don't think I've ever been referred to as an "immigrant".)

We can take the concept of skin colour out of it if you like for the purposes of this dicussion, although I think it's an inextricable component, and ask why natives of different countries receive different labels for doing and being the exact same thing as each other. I appreciate your attempt to create a distinction, but it doesn't exist in definition and it doesn't exist in the middle ground of reality.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 26, 2017, 09:43:09 PM
The people in the article you linked showed absolutely no intention of returning, and economics were certainly part of the moving process (note the comments about affordability of healthcare etc). Why are they expats and not immigrants?

Let me put it to you another way: you say that 'the white Eastern Europeans who move to Toronto for a better life aren't "expats"', but as a white Western European who moved to Toronto for a better life why am I referred to as one when they aren't? (I don't think I've ever been referred to as an "immigrant".)

We can take the concept of skin colour out of it if you like for the purposes of this dicussion, although I think it's an inextricable component, and ask why natives of different countries receive different labels for doing and being the exact same thing as each other. I appreciate your attempt to create a distinction, but it doesn't exist in definition and it doesn't exist in the middle ground of reality.

You're not getting my point. Expats don't typically have to jump through hoops to get to the country they want to live in, for whatever reason. I had the option of continuing to work in Hong Kong as a salesman, but I chose not to and came back home. Had I decided to stay, I would've been making about the same as I do know, but enjoying certain fringe benefits that expats enjoy. It wouldn't have been out of necessity, nor would I have benefited much in comparison to being here. It would have been a choice because, again for whatever reason, either a better opportunity came about that I wanted to take a chance on, or I just felt like living there.

You're an expat in Canada because there's no reason why you can't get equal pay at a similar company in England. Americans, Western Europeans, or Japanese with MBAs or advanced degrees don't move to a similarly developed country just to drive a taxi. But you have former physicists in Eastern Europe who drive cabs in London, New York, or Toronto. Same with the brown people you mentioned. I was in a cab the other day and the guy driving me was a doctor in India. Said he could make way more for him and his family driving a cab in the US than being a doctor in Hyderabad.

There's a huge difference. I see it, but you don't. You want to make it about race, because that's your shtick. Those Americans in the article didn't move to Mexico because America can't provide the opportunities that Mexico can. They made a choice. Poor people from lesser developed nations who are ambitious and want more (more than what they can get in their home country) are the ones who emigrate out. A UK college graduate who decides to teach English in Botswana because he wants something different, and because he has the luxury to do so, isn't an immigrant. The guy from Botswana who even with an advanced degree, can't feed his family, has a reason to go to the UK and drive a cab. He's the immigrant.

I don't get why you're making a mountain out of a anthill here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on June 26, 2017, 10:30:42 PM
Today I learned I'm a second generation ex-pat instead of a second generation immigrant. Nice.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 27, 2017, 12:29:14 AM
Today I learned I'm a second generation ex-pat instead of a second generation immigrant. Nice.

Jesus fuckn Christ. Fine, all white people who move to another country are expats and all brown, yellow, black people are immigrants.

Congratulations. You just found another stupid fuckn thing to complain about.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on June 27, 2017, 12:42:55 AM
Congratulations. You just found another stupid fuckn thing to complain about.

Wait, what am I complaining about?

edit: I don't think I posted what you think I posted - tbh I don't see a "huge difference" between immigrants and expats, but I really don't give a excrement what you decide to call any of them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 27, 2017, 08:32:13 AM
I don't get why you're making a mountain out of a anthill here.

Because it's funny watching you twist yourself into knots. I mean, you're clearly wrong. There's an obvious distinction, and you even made it yourself.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on June 29, 2017, 12:40:01 PM
Because it's funny watching you twist yourself into knots. I mean, you're clearly wrong. There's an obvious distinction, and you even made it yourself.

There is, but has nothing to do with race and more about economics. Your post about "only brown people being called immigrants" was in jest, but I hear that all the time. Leaving a communist country to raise a family in a first world country makes you an immigrant regardless of ethnicity. Leaving your country to teach English in Thailand makes you an expat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on June 29, 2017, 01:20:46 PM
Tons of expats are artists looking for inspiration, or extremely wealthy people just globe trotting at a slow pace.

Folks moving from country A to country B, specifically to improve their financial quality of life, with every intention of becoming a citizen some day, are immigrants.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on July 03, 2017, 01:53:54 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DDyGNSRUMAAZY4c?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 03, 2017, 03:51:53 PM
lolololololol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 04, 2017, 11:56:45 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/03/world/americas/honduras-migration-border-wall.html

Has it really gotten to the point where we're now supposed to feel bad for would-be illegal immigrants who are now afraid to come here illegally?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on July 04, 2017, 12:26:56 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/07/03/world/americas/honduras-migration-border-wall.html

Has it really gotten to the point where we're now supposed to feel bad for would-be illegal immigrants who are now afraid to come here illegally?
Illegal immigrants of any kind are a far lesser problem for this great Nation than 1)an "army" of armed Trumpdicks showing up at Gettysburg on the anniversary of the battle to protect Confederate monuments (of which there are none) from evil libruls (also none there)

And 2) and far worse, our WH occupied by a seriously mentally ill degenerate taking all his direction from Moscow

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 04, 2017, 01:17:24 PM
Illegal immigrants of any kind are a far lesser problem for this great Nation than 1)an "army" of armed Trumpdicks showing up at Gettysburg on the anniversary of the battle to protect Confederate monuments (of which there are none) from evil libruls (also none there)

And 2) and far worse, our WH occupied by a seriously mentally ill degenerate taking all his direction from Moscow

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

You crazy old bastard, I can't believe you've committed an entire 8 months to this trolljob. You're beautiful.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 05, 2017, 12:41:19 AM
You crazy old bastard, I can't believe you've committed an entire 8 months to this trolljob. You're beautiful.
He's actually got a point here.

Please compare the number of US citizens killed by illegal immigrants to lightning, and toddlers with guns.

To his other point, Trump is an old senile pig.  Feel free to support his dimentia in chief.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 05, 2017, 01:15:52 AM
He's actually got a point here.

Please compare the number of US citizens killed by illegal immigrants to lightning, and toddlers with guns.

To his other point, Trump is an old senile pig.  Feel free to support his dimentia in chief.

He has no point. Entering this country without a visa is against the law. Who cares about the number of murders committed by illegals? There are far greater issues with having people freely hop across the border or overstay their visas. You can't just write it off with "oh well we have bigger problems."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on July 05, 2017, 04:19:17 AM
He has no point. Entering this country without a visa is against the law. Who cares about the number of murders committed by illegals? There are far greater issues with having people freely hop across the border or overstay their visas. You can't just write it off with "oh well we have bigger problems."
Jaywalking is also against the law. 

Trump needs to hire more Nazis to devote trillions of dollars to building walls at crosswalks and rounding up, arresting, prosecuting and imprisoning jaywalkers and their children and grandchildren too.



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 05, 2017, 09:45:57 AM


He has no point. Entering this country without a visa is against the law. Who cares about the number of murders committed by illegals? There are far greater issues with having people freely hop across the border or overstay their visas. You can't just write it off with "oh well we have bigger problems."

Still waiting on those far greater issues to be laid out.  Trump's entire immigration stance, illegal or legal, is built on a house of cards known as safety, which is entirely bullshit.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 05, 2017, 10:01:18 AM

Still waiting on those far greater issues to be laid out.  Trump's entire immigration stance, illegal or legal, is built on a house of cards known as safety, which is entirely bullshit.



Honestly, I'd be more concerned about the financial side of things regarding illegals getting benefits or not paying taxes.  I honestly don't know if that is a huge financial problem in the grand scheme of things.  While it's annoying to see illegal immigrants getting benefits without paying taxes, I don't know how often it actually happens or if it even is a huge amount of money lost.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 05, 2017, 11:20:20 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics/kfile-reddit-user-trump-tweet/index.html

Nice work guys, showed that kid who's boss
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 05, 2017, 11:24:12 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics/kfile-reddit-user-trump-tweet/index.html

Nice work guys, showed that kid who's boss

Yeah, because CNN are the assholes here.

I think the only takeaway from this story is that even some anonymous cretin on Reddit has greater self awareness and accountability than that piece of excrement in the White House.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 05, 2017, 12:29:50 PM
CNN are the assholes here.

Quoted for truth, glad we finally agree.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 05, 2017, 12:43:57 PM
Quote
In a since-deleted Reddit post, HanA--holeSolo apologized and said he did not support "any violence against anyone." CNN's Andrew Kaczynski said the Redditor later called CNN to apologize further after the network had tracked down the user through Facebook and other biographical data the user had posted on Reddit.

After interviewing the user, CNN's investigative team said it chose not to reveal his identity because he apologized. In the interview, the Reddit user said he was worried about safety and public embarrassment if his real name were to be made public.

"CNN is not publishing 'HanA**holeSolo's' name because he is a private citizen who has issued an extensive statement of apology, showed his remorse by saying he has taken down all his offending posts, and because he said he is not going to repeat this ugly behavior on social media again," CNN said in its story. "In addition, he said his statement could serve as an example to others not to do the same."

"CNN reserves the right to publish his identity should any of that change," the article continued, suggesting a conditional agreement to protect the user's identity.

This caveat was widely criticized on social media, with many users saying CNN had threatened to dox someone for making a GIF with its logo on it. On Wednesday morning, the hashtag #CNNBlackmail started trending on Twitter as a response to the article.

To be fair the Stunner in that gif was vicious. CNN is just protecting themselves here
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 05, 2017, 01:49:06 PM
Honestly, I'd be more concerned about the financial side of things regarding illegals getting benefits or not paying taxes.  I honestly don't know if that is a huge financial problem in the grand scheme of things.  While it's annoying to see illegal immigrants getting benefits without paying taxes, I don't know how often it actually happens or if it even is a huge amount of money lost.
Most illegals orininally come here legally.  They have a work ID number, similar to a SSN, so they can get a job and pay taxes.  Most keep using that number when they overstay their visa, or leave and come back illegally.  In other words, they keep paying taxes.

They are NOT eligible for medicaid or welfare assistance.  That is a right wing lie that has been said enough times that people actually believe it.

Yes, they do use the ER when they get sick, and usually cannot afford to pay.  That is true.

Financially, the cost of billions of dollars in crops rotting in the fields right now, is a much bigger deal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 05, 2017, 01:56:27 PM
Most illegals orininally come here legally.  They have a work ID number, similar to a SSN, so they can get a job and pay taxes.  Most keep using that number when they overstay their visa, or leave and come back illegally.  In other words, they keep paying taxes.

They are NOT eligible for medicaid or welfare assistance.  That is a right wing lie that has been said enough times that people actually believe it.

Yes, they do use the ER when they get sick, and usually cannot afford to pay.  That is true.

Financially, the cost of billions of dollars in crops rotting in the fields right now, is a much bigger deal.

Most? Yeah, no.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 05, 2017, 04:14:34 PM
Most illegals orininally come here legally.  They have a work ID number, similar to a SSN, so they can get a job and pay taxes.  Most keep using that number when they overstay their visa, or leave and come back illegally.  In other words, they keep paying taxes.

They are NOT eligible for medicaid or welfare assistance.  That is a right wing lie that has been said enough times that people actually believe it.

Yes, they do use the ER when they get sick, and usually cannot afford to pay.  That is true.

Financially, the cost of billions of dollars in crops rotting in the fields right now, is a much bigger deal.

Are most farms owned by the US government? Because if not, why should I be concerned about the multibillion dollar agricultural industry? Surely they could raise real wages for the millions if Americans out of work, no?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 05, 2017, 05:10:29 PM
Are most farms owned by the US government? Because if not, why should I be concerned about the multibillion dollar agricultural industry? Surely they could raise real wages for the millions if Americans out of work, no?
How do you think those companies will make up the losses?  Businesses don't survive without being profitable. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 05, 2017, 05:12:45 PM
How do you think those companies will make up the losses?  Businesses don't survive without being profitable. 

Doesn't the government already pay farms to NOT make too much food? If some have to shut their doors then we save even more money. And the farms can't jack up prices too much or else stores will start buying their products from other countries which they do anyway

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 05, 2017, 05:40:57 PM
Apparently CNN got the wrong person.

Hahaha. Hahahahahaha. Hahahahahahahahahahahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. What freaking imbeciles.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 05, 2017, 07:14:16 PM

Still waiting on those far greater issues to be laid out.  Trump's entire immigration stance, illegal or legal, is built on a house of cards known as safety, which is entirely bullshit.

The case against illegal immigration isn't safety, it's the fact that it's illegal and driving down labor costs and keeping unskilled Americans on government programs. It's an economics issue. You can't flood the market with cheap unskilled labor and then say we need more government assistance or a higher minimum wage. I can't believe this has to even be argued. The murders committed by illegals were highlighted by Trump to illustrate just how fucked up our current system is run. Yeah, the vast majority of illegals just want to work and send money home, but they're not supposed to be here in the first place. Those criminals who make it through, some who unbelievably get released after getting arrested, are inexcusable and shows a failure in the manner in which the federal government has been dealing with the issue.

Turning illegal immigration into a partisan issue is what's wrong with this country. The Left feels they have to defend it only because The Right is rightfully against it. You're even doing it now. I wish you could see how transparent you are.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 05, 2017, 08:29:17 PM
The case against illegal immigration isn't safety, it's the fact that it's illegal and driving down labor costs and keeping unskilled Americans on government programs.

Except that California appears to be proving that untrue at the moment. The illegal unskilled labour isn't turning up, and the jobs continue to go unfilled by Americans.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 05, 2017, 08:52:36 PM
Does the left ever think that the reason that these jobs go to illegal immigrants is these companies can get away with paying them off the books less than the minimum wage ?

I dont know how the same people who are fighting for 15, are also ok with illegals coming here and getting paid 100 dollars a day to do field labor.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 05, 2017, 10:11:27 PM
https://theintercept.com/2017/07/01/dick-gephardt-single-payer-health-insurance-lobbyists/

What a queynte.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 05, 2017, 10:35:31 PM
Except that California appears to be proving that untrue at the moment. The illegal unskilled labour isn't turning up, and the jobs continue to go unfilled by Americans.

What are you basing this on?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 06, 2017, 06:24:47 PM
Apparently CNN got the wrong person.

Hahaha. Hahahahahaha. Hahahahahahahahahahahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. What freaking imbeciles.

Did they? I haven't seen anything to that effect.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/07/04/politics/kfile-reddit-user-trump-tweet/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 07, 2017, 06:47:00 PM
What CNN did was pretty bad, but nothing illegal about it. They're well within their rights to disclose the name of the user.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 07, 2017, 08:24:10 PM
What CNN did was pretty bad, but nothing illegal about it. They're well within their rights to disclose the name of the user.

It's not a good look though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on July 07, 2017, 09:32:45 PM
It's not a good look though.

that dude should have known something like this could happen though

talk $hit

get hit
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on July 07, 2017, 09:33:29 PM
apparently trump JR and others were talking about how it was a low-blow to do this to a 15 year old kid when the dude was a middle aged man or something
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 07, 2017, 09:48:33 PM
that dude should have known something like this could happen though

talk $hit

get hit

He's a queynte, CNN's a queynte. They're all cunts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 07, 2017, 10:36:55 PM
He's a queynte, CNN's a queynte. They're all cunts.

Agreed. I'm still not sure what CNN is outing him for. Because of the gif? Or because racist/antisemetic comments on Reddit? Which they found because they had to get to the bottom of the gif.

Can we at least be clear that the only reason this is a story is because CNN is butthurt this guy put them in a WWE .gif?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on July 08, 2017, 12:05:18 AM
Agreed. I'm still not sure what CNN is outing him for. Because of the gif? Or because racist/antisemetic comments on Reddit? Which they found because they had to get to the bottom of the gif.

Can we at least be clear that the only reason this is a story is because CNN is butthurt this guy put them in a WWE .gif?

not that im defending CNN because i thought they were excrement long before trump ever went after them, but i think they only cared because trump actually retweeted it to his timeline, which in and of itself was a cringeworthy moment, is he 12 or is he the president of the US. that's the type of excrement my little wack 8 year old cousin does
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on July 08, 2017, 04:24:37 AM
What CNN did was pretty bad, but nothing illegal about it. They're well within their rights to disclose the name of the user.

It's the same deal as when you say Trump's douchey way of handling things isn't actually illegal.

"You're not wrong Walter, you're just an poopchute."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 08, 2017, 05:30:11 AM
CNN has turned into a joke.  They were news gods for a long derriere time, starting with the first Iraq war.

Then Fox happened, then a more liberal MSNBC happened, then CNN went even more liberal, and then Fox went insane, and then MSNBC benched the Sharptons and hired republican Fox defectors.

There is no question which cable news channel is the most fair and balanced now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 08, 2017, 09:10:39 AM
CNN has turned into a joke.  They were news gods for a long derriere time, starting with the first Iraq war.

Then Fox happened, then a more liberal MSNBC happened, then CNN went even more liberal, and then Fox went insane, and then MSNBC benched the Sharptons and hired republican Fox defectors.

There is no question which cable news channel is the most fair and balanced now.

BBC News?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 08, 2017, 09:55:14 AM

http://media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Video/201705/2017-05-14T14-18-35-5Z--1280x720.video_1067x600.jpg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 08, 2017, 01:22:13 PM
CNN has turned into a joke.  They were news gods for a long derriere time, starting with the first Iraq war.

Then Fox happened, then a more liberal MSNBC happened, then CNN went even more liberal, and then Fox went insane, and then MSNBC benched the Sharptons and hired republican Fox defectors.

There is no question which cable news channel is the most fair and balanced now.

There's no such thing as fair and balanced cable news. They'd get no ratings if they didn't have political analysts arguing on both sides and pompous assholes who are trying to tell viewers how to think. It's all entertainment being passed off as "news".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 08, 2017, 04:17:28 PM
BBC News?
Well, domestically I was implying msnbc, but bbc is pretty damn good too, but I haven't watched in awhile.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 08, 2017, 04:20:21 PM
http://media1.s-nbcnews.com/j/MSNBC/Components/Video/201705/2017-05-14T14-18-35-5Z--1280x720.video_1067x600.jpg
Joy and Maxine.  Although I tend to agree with both, that is a liberal circle jerk I cannot always defend.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 08, 2017, 11:35:19 PM
Just met Ann Coulter at Heidelberg she was ducked up
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 09, 2017, 04:51:44 AM
Just met Ann Coulter at Heidelberg she was ducked up
Did you touch her balls?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 09, 2017, 08:09:28 PM
Did you touch her balls?

He ducked her dick.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 18, 2017, 06:10:51 PM
https://theintercept.com/2017/07/18/mitch-mcconnell-has-run-out-of-excuses-for-not-accomplishing-anything/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 19, 2017, 07:46:22 PM
John McCain diagnosed with a brain tumour. I don't agree with a lot of his politics but he seems like a decent and principled man, I hope he can recover from this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 19, 2017, 11:31:14 PM
John McCain diagnosed with a brain tumour. I don't agree with a lot of his politics but he seems like a decent and principled man, I hope he can recover from this.

From the way its been described it sounds extremely probable that he's not going to live long. Supposedly the survival rate for somebody his age is 6-7 months, with a 3-5% chance of him making it 5 years.

Of course him being a famous and powerful senator could open up special treatments and resources that would never be an option to ordinary folks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 19, 2017, 11:36:25 PM
And maybe it's just ideal thinking. But the seriousness of this issue and the timing. Maybe McCain uses this to cement his legacy pushing healthcare reform. A tragedy like this is about the only thing that could get Republicans and democrats to come togetherness and possibly consider a moderate bill that both parties could actually get behind.

After all McCain has said he wanted to return to work, but I could easily see that plan getting scratched considering his time is limited
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on July 20, 2017, 06:19:03 AM
I can already see Gary Oldman just killing it in that movie. Too bad the part where something like that happens in real life won't come to reality.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 20, 2017, 07:02:10 AM


A tragedy like this is about the only thing that could get Republicans and democrats to come togetherness and possibly consider a moderate bill that both parties could actually get behind.

i.e., "We're only going to slash Medicaid funding a little and let insurance companies freak you a little more."

Moderates!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 20, 2017, 07:41:09 AM
Explains that confusion episode he had when Comey testified.  Sucks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 20, 2017, 08:18:36 AM

i.e., "We're only going to slash Medicaid funding a little and let insurance companies freak you a little more."

Moderates!

It's not unfathomable for both sides to make some concessions. Obviously nobody is going to sign off on giving the other everything they want
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 20, 2017, 10:11:19 AM
It's not unfathomable for both sides to make some concessions. Obviously nobody is going to sign off on giving the other everything they want
The democrats are in a position of power here.  The ACA is the law on the books.  There is no reason to concede anything as long as republican plans keep polling in the teens.

The repeal nonsense needs to stop.  If Heller votes for repeal, he loses in 2018.   He might lose anyway.  2-3 other republican senators are in the same boat.

If they stop talking about repeal, and start talking about fixing the ACA, moderate democrats will at least come to the table.

Raise the bar for medicaid to include more people, and get rid of subsidies.  Then go after big pharm together.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 20, 2017, 11:34:15 AM
I like big pharm and the crooked insurance companies. My Valium is easy to get and only costs $10.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 20, 2017, 12:16:59 PM
The democrats are in a position of power here.  The ACA is the law on the books.  There is no reason to concede anything as long as republican plans keep polling in the teens.

The repeal nonsense needs to stop.  If Heller votes for repeal, he loses in 2018.   He might lose anyway.  2-3 other republican senators are in the same boat.

If they stop talking about repeal, and start talking about fixing the ACA, moderate democrats will at least come to the table.

Raise the bar for medicaid to include more people, and get rid of subsidies.  Then go after big pharm together.

Don't the Republicans have the The House Senate and the White House? They should work together and get excrement done

Also the ACA isn't working well, prices are high and many people with insurance aren't able to afford their insane deductibles
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 20, 2017, 02:31:20 PM


Don't the Republicans have the The House Senate and the White House? They should work together and get excrement done

Also the ACA isn't working well, prices are high and many people with insurance aren't able to afford their insane deductibles

Repeal is not going to pass, because the moderates will never vote for it.  Anything without repeal will never pass because the tea party will never vote for it.  They are screwed.

You should check out the deductibles on Walmart plans, for example.  It's not just an exchange thing.

The ACA works pretty well in blue and purple states.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 20, 2017, 02:44:46 PM
I have a hard time imagining anything passing with this Congress.  Any law.  I swear, they could have a vote on whether oxygen was good for people and it wouldn't pass.  Everyone is salty.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 20, 2017, 03:05:56 PM

Repeal is not going to pass, because the moderates will never vote for it.  Anything without repeal will never pass because the tea party will never vote for it.  They are screwed.

You should check out the deductibles on Walmart plans, for example.  It's not just an exchange thing.

The ACA works pretty well in blue and purple states.

I'm not talking about repeal but complete bipartisan reform. And the ACA really doesn't work that well, it's too expensive and plans costs are increasing incredibly fast
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 20, 2017, 03:07:07 PM
I have a hard time imagining anything passing with this Congress.  Any law.  I swear, they could have a vote on whether oxygen was good for people and it wouldn't pass.  Everyone is salty.
Rand Paul despises Trump.  Graham is starting to let his hatred show.  Rubio is likely the next to distance himself.  Cruz seems to be the only one willing to go down with the Titanic.

With McCain, who was already right there with Graham, out for a bit, nothing major is getting passed in 2017.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 20, 2017, 03:11:24 PM


I'm not talking about repeal but complete bipartisan reform. And the ACA really doesn't work that well, it's too expensive and plans costs are increasing incredibly fast

No repeal, no tea party votes.

If they take repeal off the table (they won't) some bipartisan work could get done.

Premiums and deductibles in blue and purple states are going up at a slower rate than before the ACA.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on July 20, 2017, 08:22:44 PM
I have a hard time imagining anything passing with this Congress.  Any law.  I swear, they could have a vote on whether oxygen was good for people and it wouldn't pass.  Everyone is salty.

I feel like I've had it altogether with politics. It was fun watching Trump win as a big FU to the establishment and whiny people on the left, but now I'm kinda like "meh". I just don't have the energy to get emotionally invested in this crap anymore.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 20, 2017, 09:34:01 PM

No repeal, no tea party votes.

If they take repeal off the table (they won't) some bipartisan work could get done.

Premiums and deductibles in blue and purple states are going up at a slower rate than before the ACA.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2017/03/22/yes-it-was-the-affordable-care-act-that-increased-premiums/#219cdceb11d2
Quote
t turns out that across the board, for all ages and family sizes, for HMO, PPO, and POS plans, premium increases averaged about 60 percent from 2013, the last year before ACA reforms took effect, to 2017. In same length of time preceding that, all groups experienced premium increases of less than 10 percent, and most age groups actually experienced premium decreases, on average.

tell me more
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 21, 2017, 02:23:16 AM
https://www.forbes.com/sites/theapothecary/2017/03/22/yes-it-was-the-affordable-care-act-that-increased-premiums/#219cdceb11d2
tell me more
So the author, an obvious conservative with an agenda, talks about cherry picking being bad, than uses unsubstaniated data, from which he obviously cherry picked data.

I read through some of his other articles and checked his CV to confirm my suspicions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on July 21, 2017, 04:07:27 AM
So the author, an obvious conservative with an agenda, talks about cherry picking being bad, than uses unsubstaniated data, from which he obviously cherry picked data.

I read through some of his other articles and checked his CV to confirm my suspicions.
Next dcm will be sourcing Ann Coulter, Tucker Carlson and Sean Hannity as EXPERTS on the failure of Pres Obama
and the YUUUUUGE success of Crooked Donnie of Russia

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 21, 2017, 05:24:52 AM
So the author, an obvious conservative with an agenda, talks about cherry picking being bad, than uses unsubstaniated data, from which he obviously cherry picked data.

I read through some of his other articles and checked his CV to confirm my suspicions.

Link that supports your claims about premiums?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 21, 2017, 09:29:27 AM
Link that supports your claims about premiums?
It's been widely reported for years outside of the far right echo chamber.  I don't have the time or energy to sift through years of reports at the moment.

The fact that the author showed premiums going down before the ACA, discredited the rest of his article.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 21, 2017, 10:05:16 AM
It's been widely reported for years outside of the far right echo chamber.  I don't have the time or energy to sift through years of reports at the moment.

The fact that the author showed premiums going down before the ACA, discredited the rest of his article.



Well if it's widely reported it must be difficult to find
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 21, 2017, 10:08:45 AM


Private insurance isn't working well, prices are high and many people aren't able to afford their insane deductibles

FYP
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 21, 2017, 10:13:09 AM

FYP


I pay 260$ a year, and have little to no deductibles with my private insurance in network

But these people paying 600-1200 a month on Obama care with high deductible plans ranging in the several thousands don't seem very happy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 21, 2017, 10:51:36 AM
I pay 260$ a year, and have little to no deductibles with my private insurance in network

But these people paying 600-1200 a month on Obama care with high deductible plans ranging in the several thousands don't seem very happy
Yeah, those insurance companies are freaking them pretty hard.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 21, 2017, 10:58:44 AM
Yeah, those insurance companies are freaking them pretty hard.

I don't know anything about hunt individual insurance before but these high deductible packages are the crux of the ACA
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 21, 2017, 11:19:39 AM
Rand Paul despises Trump. 

Humor me. Where on earth have you gotten this idea from? Rand's had ideological disagreements with the healthcare plan, but hes been pretty staunch in defending Trump in public.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 21, 2017, 11:25:45 AM
Whole government is mired in sludge, controversy and inaction.  Things can change quickly, but it looks like 4 years of a whole lot of nothing.  Nothing new I guess, just worse.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 21, 2017, 11:51:39 AM


I don't know anything about hunt individual insurance before

We know.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on July 21, 2017, 01:00:18 PM
The premiums on both my wife's and my company-offered insurance plans skyrocketed under the ACA. I was against the ACA before it became law because I knew it would happen.

That said, a full repeal would do irreparable harm to the healthcare system in the US now. A repeal-and-replace isn't a good (or popular) option either.

But the ACA needs reform. Anyone who doesn't believe that is cheering too loudly for the left.

I've never been into the idea of single-payer. We need a system that applies basic coverage (including cancer treatment, pregnancy, and prescription drugs) to every single US citizen. Then insurance providers can layer options on top. Everyone is covered for the most important needs, and additional insurance then becomes a "luxury" choice (and goes back to being an incentive to attract quality employees).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 27, 2017, 12:10:31 AM
This is a really interesting article.

http://www.motherjones.com/crime-justice/2017/07/north-dakota-norway-prisons-experiment/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 28, 2017, 01:31:46 AM
McCain with the deciding vote.  Repeal should finally be dead.  I could taste the turtle's delicious tears.

Now hopefully these overpaid fuckwits will work together and fix the exchanges.

Heller kissed his job goodbye tonight.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on July 28, 2017, 09:50:30 AM
Repeal is dead, but while everyone is loudly celebrating a "win" I'm sure there are GOP members, led by McConnell and Ryan, plotting yet another bill.

There's no way this fight is over. And they'll just be more underhanded with it going forward. They'll table it for now, but what happens if McCain can no longer serve and is replaced with a more "in line" rep? Pence is still the tie-breaker.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 28, 2017, 10:11:37 AM
Repeal is dead, but while everyone is loudly celebrating a "win" I'm sure there are GOP members, led by McConnell and Ryan, plotting yet another bill.

There's no way this fight is over. And they'll just be more underhanded with it going forward. They'll table it for now, but what happens if McCain can no longer serve and is replaced with a more "in line" rep? Pence is still the tie-breaker.

The bigger concern is not Republicans passing something soon.  The ACA won't survive without continued support financially.  Trump will just let that lapse and speed the failure.  What happens after it becomes necessary for both sides to do something........that's anyone's guess.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 28, 2017, 10:15:45 AM
Repeal is dead, but while everyone is loudly celebrating a "win" I'm sure there are GOP members, led by McConnell and Ryan, plotting yet another bill.

There's no way this fight is over. And they'll just be more underhanded with it going forward. They'll table it for now, but what happens if McCain can no longer serve and is replaced with a more "in line" rep? Pence is still the tie-breaker.
They have too much actual work to do in the fall.  I could certainly be wrong, but I believe repeal is tabled until 2018.  At that point, repeal without replace leading up to the mid terms could cost them both houses.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on July 28, 2017, 10:36:40 AM
The bigger concern is not Republicans passing something soon.  The ACA won't survive without continued support financially.  Trump will just let that lapse and speed the failure.  What happens after it becomes necessary for both sides to do something........that's anyone's guess.

Right. Trump already cryptically tweeted about it "failing on its own." That's why I think this celebration by the left is ridiculous today. It may be "safe" for the moment, but it just kicks the can down the line to be worse later.

They have too much actual work to do in the fall.  I could certainly be wrong, but I believe repeal is tabled until 2018.  At that point, repeal without replace leading up to the mid terms could cost them both houses.

Yeah, McConnell has already said they'll move on to other issues post-recess. But this isn't over. And I wouldn't be shocked if they start sliding in amendments on bills to strangle the ACA slowly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on July 29, 2017, 12:59:44 PM
Right. Trump already cryptically tweeted about it "failing on its own." That's why I think this celebration by the left is ridiculous today. It may be "safe" for the moment, but it just kicks the can down the line to be worse later.

Yeah, McConnell has already said they'll move on to other issues post-recess. But this isn't over. And I wouldn't be shocked if they start sliding in amendments on bills to strangle the ACA slowly.
I don't see celebration on the left.  The ACA is law.  Are you happy when you swat away a fly from your potato salad?  Of course, but you don't celebrate.

The worst president in history will attack subsidies next, becauses he's a freaking dick and he can.  He'll do it out of spite, not because he has any clue what day it is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on July 31, 2017, 10:15:05 AM
I don't see celebration on the left.  The ACA is law.  Are you happy when you swat away a fly from your potato salad?  Of course, but you don't celebrate.

The worst president in history will attack subsidies next, becauses he's a freaking dick and he can.  He'll do it out of spite, not because he has any clue what day it is.

There's been a lot of celebrating and back-patting over this "victory" and yet here we are, a few days later, and the right is again looking for ways to repeal the ACA.

There are only 2 outcomes at this point: 1) Democrats hold off repeal efforts long enough (and that will involve McCain surviving through mid-terms) or 2) the GOP will keep ramming legislation through until something sticks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on July 31, 2017, 05:16:27 PM
Yeah one shitty legislation got saved because the one replacing it is even shittier. Wow that's the state of Legislation we're accustomed to. excrement why do what's right by the people that voted you in when you can be a freaking thief in the night.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 31, 2017, 07:27:01 PM


I don't see celebration on the left.  The ACA is law.  Are you happy when you swat away a fly from your potato salad?  Of course, but you don't celebrate.

Trump told me there were thousands of Muslims celebrating in the streets.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 01, 2017, 10:36:20 AM
I'm glad to see the US put sanctions on Venezuela, but what's happening there is a stark warning to us here.

After an "election" where the ruling party claims the people gave them virtually unlimited powers, they arrested opposition leaders in the middle of the night.

Quote
Their apprehension comes a day after the United States slapped sanctions on unpopular leftist Maduro for a new legislative superbody, the constituent assembly, which was elected on Sunday in a vote boycotted by the opposition. The new assembly will have powers to rewrite the constitution and supersede other institutions, including the opposition-dominated congress. Both men had been urging protests against the vote, which they charged was rigged and a naked power grab by Maduro to avoid free and fair elections that he would lose.

Quote
Families: Venezuela seizes opposition leaders Lopez, Ledezma from homes (http://bit.ly/2whHw2C)

The current President would like to jail his previous opponent. He has also been investigating the limits of the pardoning process. Those alone are solidly tactics of dictatorial regimes, much less the constant attacks on the media, and the Congressional push for further gerrymandering (though I saw that a federal court ordered North Carolina to reconfigure districts away from their gerrymandered definitions, which is a huge win for democracy).

This is why I've been so active on social media about the current state of our government. I don't care if you're red or blue. We can argue over things like whether healthcare should be a right. What we shouldn't argue over is whether a President should be able to pardon himself for working with foreign intelligence to win an election. Or whether it's okay for said President to undermine the free press--whether he likes the stories coming out or not.

As Americans, we love to think "never here." Complacency is dangerous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 01, 2017, 10:51:13 AM
I'm glad to see the US put sanctions on Venezuela, but what's happening there is a stark warning to us here.

After an "election" where the ruling party claims the people gave them virtually unlimited powers, they arrested opposition leaders in the middle of the night.

The current President would like to jail his previous opponent. He has also been investigating the limits of the pardoning process. Those alone are solidly tactics of dictatorial regimes, much less the constant attacks on the media, and the Congressional push for further gerrymandering (though I saw that a federal court ordered North Carolina to reconfigure districts away from their gerrymandered definitions, which is a huge win for democracy).

This is why I've been so active on social media about the current state of our government. I don't care if you're red or blue. We can argue over things like whether healthcare should be a right. What we shouldn't argue over is whether a President should be able to pardon himself for working with foreign intelligence to win an election. Or whether it's okay for said President to undermine the free press--whether he likes the stories coming out or not.

As Americans, we love to think "never here." Complacency is dangerous.

I have no problem with starting an investigation on Clinton.  That should happen whether she's his previous opponent or not.  I don't think he should be able to pardon himself in any way, if that is indeed true.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 01, 2017, 11:01:17 AM
I have no problem with starting an investigation on Clinton.  That should happen whether she's his previous opponent or not.  I don't think he should be able to pardon himself in any way, if that is indeed true.

It's not the idea that there should be an investigation that's a problem; it's the idea that he's only pursuing it out of revenge. Dictators prosecute their defeated opponents. On its own, investigating Clinton isn't a reason for concern, it's when you factor it in with everything else that it looks suspicious at best.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 01, 2017, 02:00:57 PM
It's not the idea that there should be an investigation that's a problem; it's the idea that he's only pursuing it out of revenge. Dictators prosecute their defeated opponents. On its own, investigating Clinton isn't a reason for concern, it's when you factor it in with everything else that it looks suspicious at best.

Didn't the FBI already say that there was no case to investigate?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 01, 2017, 02:14:52 PM
Didn't the FBI already say that there was no case to investigate?
You mean the (((FBI)))?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 01, 2017, 02:16:36 PM
You mean the (((FBI)))?

I don't know what means, so I don't know if it's what I mean.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 01, 2017, 03:17:42 PM
Didn't the FBI already say that there was no case to investigate?

Possibly. To be honest, I have no idea.

But that wasn't really my point. Trump's personal pursuit of prosecution is what I have an issue with. He "won" and should be doing the job of being President of the United States, and yet here we are, 7 months later, and he still talks about how he wants her investigated.

It's just one more drop in the dictatorial bucket, and that's the heart of my concern. Hillary herself doesn't have a lot of relevance one way or the other to me at this point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 01, 2017, 04:23:52 PM
Possibly. To be honest, I have no idea.

But that wasn't really my point. Trump's personal pursuit of prosecution is what I have an issue with. He "won" and should be doing the job of being President of the United States, and yet here we are, 7 months later, and he still talks about how he wants her investigated.

It's just one more drop in the dictatorial bucket, and that's the heart of my concern. Hillary herself doesn't have a lot of relevance one way or the other to me at this point.

He should be focusing on his job, but along the same lines, she shouldn't get away with wrongdoing (if there was any) just because she lost.  Losing doesn't give you a get out of jail free card.  But Trump would be better served shutting the freak up about it and letting someone else handle it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on August 01, 2017, 11:29:42 PM
He should be focusing on his job, but along the same lines, she shouldn't get away with wrongdoing (if there was any) just because she lost.  Losing doesn't give you a get out of jail free card.  But Trump would be better served shutting the freak up about it and letting someone else handle it.
Republicans have been investigating Hillary for 2 decades.  Nothing.  When is enough enough?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on August 02, 2017, 04:05:02 AM
Meanwhile back to the TRAITOR in the White House.

Good news for the MORON..he didn't fire anybody yesterday

Bad news for the MORON.. he got caught dictating his son's summary of the meeting with Russian agents he has been denying he attended or knew anything about.

He got caught conspiring with Faux News to cook up a Seth Rich conspiracy story that Faux News had to retract and apologize for

Good news for America.. the MORON is scheduled for two weeks of taxpayer paid golf and self enrichment in the upcoming month

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 02, 2017, 09:07:40 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170803/70e75666ec1f232dc83e65e6c6780ec9.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 03, 2017, 12:57:02 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170803/70e75666ec1f232dc83e65e6c6780ec9.jpg)

Haha. Reminded me of this old bit:

https://youtu.be/ftgmdRlDkko
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 03, 2017, 07:43:32 AM
Probably will be years in the works, but could eventually change affirmative action for the country

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/08/02/us/affirmative-action-battle-has-a-new-focus-asian-americans.html?referer=https://www.reddit.com/r/news/comments/6r9kb2/a_lawsuit_accuses_harvard_of_discriminating/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 03, 2017, 11:59:48 AM
Without reading that article, I find it hilarious that the Administration (with the support of their followers) are going after "discriminatory practices" against white people in the college acceptance arena.

These are the same people who constantly harp about how "if you want better things, just work harder."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 03, 2017, 12:10:55 PM
Without reading that article

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 03, 2017, 12:46:19 PM
Lol

Because I don't know whether it's related to the same story or not. It just brings up a related current topic if it's not, hence: "without reading the article [to verify whether it's the same story or a related one]..."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 03, 2017, 01:36:48 PM
Because I don't know whether it's related to the same story or not. It just brings up a related current topic if it's not, hence: "without reading the article [to verify whether it's the same story or a related one]..."

The article is about discrimination against Asian Americans when it comes to colleges and how the way colleges do admissions based on race is akin to racial quotas
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 03, 2017, 01:50:50 PM
The article is about discrimination against Asian Americans when it comes to colleges and how the way colleges do admissions based on race is akin to racial quotas

freaking white people
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on August 05, 2017, 04:15:39 AM
The article is about discrimination against Asian Americans when it comes to colleges and how the way colleges do admissions based on race is akin to racial quotas
Not the case in NY where most colleges look like they are in Hong Kong or Beijing

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 05, 2017, 08:21:19 AM
Not the case in NY where most colleges look like they are in Hong Kong or Beijing

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



It's probably the case still that an Asian person needs to have significantly higher grades to get into the same school than any other ethnicity
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 05, 2017, 08:24:46 AM
It's probably the case still that an Asian person needs to have significantly higher grades to get into the same school than any other ethnicity
They just aren't allowed to drive on campus.  Or anywhere.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 05, 2017, 08:39:21 AM
They just aren't allowed to drive on campus.  Or anywhere.

lololol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on August 05, 2017, 08:42:34 AM
Not the case in NY where most colleges look like they are in Hong Kong or Beijing

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Because Asian and Indian Americans weren't brought up with "the only reason you can't succeed in this country is because the white man is bringing you down" instilled in them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on August 05, 2017, 08:47:02 AM
Because Asian and Indian Americans weren't brought up with "the only reason you can't succeed in this country is because the white man is bringing you down" instilled in them.

Just the much healthier no fun or friends or anything else besides straight A's and extracurriculars.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on August 05, 2017, 12:06:07 PM
the backstory of the common asian or indian you'd meet in america is much different than the average black american, who is most likely a product of slavery and has had their family dealing with the ramifications of that over the past 200-300 years
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 05, 2017, 05:07:12 PM
Just the much healthier no fun or friends or anything else besides straight A's and extracurriculars.

Do you know any Asians? They play video games like a mother fucker
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 05, 2017, 05:11:35 PM
the backstory of the common asian or indian you'd meet in america is much different than the average black american, who is most likely a product of slavery and has had their family dealing with the ramifications of that over the past 200-300 years

You do realize that China and India to this day in 2017 still have millions of people in slavery?

And that's not even counting the hundreds of millions of people who are barely a notch above slavery in their living and working conditions 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on August 05, 2017, 05:26:42 PM
You do realize that China and India to this day in 2017 still have millions of people in slavery?

And that's not even counting the hundreds of millions of people who are barely a notch above slavery in their living and working conditions 

how daft are you? what does this have to do with my post? are those slaves the ones making it over to america?


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 01, 2017, 07:16:33 PM
This excrement is going to be hilarious to watch.

http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/348921-kid-rock-lashes-out-over-alleged-campaign-finance-violation
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 01, 2017, 09:04:12 PM
This excrement is going to be hilarious to watch.

http://thehill.com/blogs/in-the-know/in-the-know/348921-kid-rock-lashes-out-over-alleged-campaign-finance-violation

How the hell is Kid Rock still around?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 06, 2017, 10:43:50 AM
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/349197-clinton-blames-sanders-for-trumps-crooked-hillary-attack

Hillary realllly needs to STFU and disappear
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on September 06, 2017, 08:03:20 PM
http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/349197-clinton-blames-sanders-for-trumps-crooked-hillary-attack

Hillary realllly needs to STFU and disappear

this fuckin bitch

i'd be surprised if she genuinely wrote anything where she takes the majority of the blame for losing on herself
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 12, 2017, 05:17:18 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170912/006cabc4dee70e2d9fa79ead67dd81c0.png)

Ted Cruz likes MILFs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 12, 2017, 07:56:28 AM
Hahahaha

Liking women and watching porn isn't anti-Christian though, so I don't get the "Jesus-loving" knock. Petty.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 12, 2017, 08:28:56 AM
Hahahaha

Liking women and watching porn isn't anti-Christian though, so I don't get the "Jesus-loving" knock. Petty.
Pretty sure porn is anti-christian.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 12, 2017, 09:04:12 AM
Pretty sure porn is anti-christian.

I guess for those Bible Belt christians. Still funny as hell though, even if he wasn't a preachy politician.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 12, 2017, 08:06:56 PM
Good.

https://interc.pt/2fgZLyU
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on September 13, 2017, 03:09:44 AM
Pretty sure porn is anti-christian.
Unless it's gay porn.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on September 13, 2017, 09:45:32 AM
Unless it's gay porn.

That's completely depending on the priest.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2017, 09:34:02 PM
https://www.bbc.com/pidgin/world-41268786
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 18, 2017, 06:28:28 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20170918/b407395c4a359bbfe78f6f8d57d0a14f.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on September 19, 2017, 03:44:55 AM
Hahaha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 19, 2017, 04:11:17 PM
Two takes on the latest ACA repeal attempt.

http://reason.com/blog/2017/09/19/the-gops-new-obamacare-repeal-bill-shoul

https://interc.pt/2fylQJJ
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on September 21, 2017, 06:17:12 PM
https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-cassidy-says-jimmy-kimmel-142308093.html (https://www.yahoo.com/news/bill-cassidy-says-jimmy-kimmel-142308093.html)

I have been following this and while I don't watch Kimmel hardly at all, he's killing Cassidy and Graham. It's been rather funny. I have to commend him on taking the initiative on health care because of his kid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on September 22, 2017, 02:04:24 AM
Bill Cassidy is unsettling. Everytime he's on MSNBC he looks like he just happily administered nerve gas to somebody. Creepy freak
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on September 23, 2017, 10:49:29 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAIbjAUNXLQ
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on September 23, 2017, 01:49:45 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WAIbjAUNXLQ
Looks more like old Commie Bern's Alzheimer's making him think he is Lenin

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 23, 2017, 02:32:47 PM
Looks more like old Commie Bern's Alzheimer's making him think he is Lenin

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk
As if you wouldn't have bent over for him in November if the choice was Sanders or Trump.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on September 23, 2017, 02:43:38 PM
Looks more like old Commie Bern's Alzheimer's making him think he is Lenin

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk
Of course

Would have voted for any alternative to Rump.

And based on performance, any of the 16 other Republicans or 3 Democrats would have been a better choice.

Probably Johnson or Stein too.

Hitler or David Duke were probably worse

My point is only that the old Commie from VT kept up his sniping and negativity right through November and beyond helping nobody but Rump immensely.

And for that I have no forgiveness in my heart

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 23, 2017, 02:54:03 PM
Of course

Would have voted for any alternative to Rump.

And based on performance, any of the 16 other Republicans or 3 Democrats would have been a better choice.

Probably Johnson or Stein too.

Hitler or David Duke were probably worse

My point is only that the old Commie from VT kept up his sniping and negativity right through November and beyond helping nobody but Rump immensely.

And for that I have no forgiveness in my heart

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk
And you'd still vote for him in 2020. Nice integrity bro.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 23, 2017, 03:05:02 PM
If Bernie can just not be dead, he'll be the leading candidate next year on the Dem side you have to think.  Kind of like Josh McCown this year.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on September 23, 2017, 04:44:35 PM
There will be a bunch of excellent choices of newcomers on the Democratic party side in 2020..

Rep Kennedy
Sen Harris
Gov Cuomo


President Pence will have his hands full with any of them


Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on September 23, 2017, 05:08:47 PM
My point is only that the old Commie from VT kept up his sniping and negativity right through November and beyond helping nobody but Rump immensely.

This is false, SG. Hilary has nobody to blame but herself for the loss, and the fact that she's made a book with a title as outrageous as 'What Happened' parlaying the blame unto others is absolutely deplorable. She is a scum human being
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on September 23, 2017, 06:19:02 PM
This is false, SG. Hilary has nobody to blame but herself for the loss, and the fact that she's made a book with a title as outrageous as 'What Happened' parlaying the blame unto others is absolutely deplorable. She is a scum human being
Compared with Dotard Rump she is a freaking SAINT.

Sorry

Not discussing addled  old Comrade Sanders anymore either.



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on September 23, 2017, 07:42:37 PM
This is false, SG. Hilary has nobody to blame but herself for the loss, and the fact that she's made a book with a title as outrageous as 'What Happened' parlaying the blame unto others is absolutely deplorable. She is a scum human being
Calling a book, "What Happened" is "outrageous?" Talk about an overreaction. I get that you don't like Hillary, but that's a pretty plain title for her opinion of what happened in the election.

I haven't read the book, and I don't plan to, but there are many reasons why Hillary lost. Her perceived shortcomings were the primary factor, but there were tons of other reasons that contributed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on September 23, 2017, 08:09:16 PM
Calling a book, "What Happened" is "outrageous?" Talk about an overreaction. I get that you don't like Hillary, but that's a pretty plain title for her opinion of what happened in the election.

I haven't read the book, and I don't plan to, but there are many reasons why Hillary lost. Her perceived shortcomings were the primary factor, but there were tons of other reasons that contributed.

it was not only calling it that, but even writing it in the first place that i found outrageous for a number of reasons that i don't feel like going into because i just don't like talking about her, but the biggest for me are that:
1 - we were all there and know what happened
2 - i see this as her just seeing another opportunity where she could profit monetarily
3 - the whole victim complex she is trying to adopt behind the book and the 'what happened' title, as if she was robbed of something and we all needed to know what went down

i agree with you that there are a number of reasons that contributed to her downfall, im with you 100% there, but ultimately i feel like the other factors that came into play (and i'm not one that has put much/any stock in all the russian conspiracy stuff) were ones that weren't eternally damning, and ones that better candidates would have been able to overcome, especially in what should have been a 'give-me' election against somebody as ridiculous as trump.

that wasn't the case, and that all comes down to her and her buddies at the DNC ruining everything, and now the country is paying for it, but she'd never say anything like that in a book like this, the blame will lay elsewhere. you of course have the right to feel differently but these are just some of the reasons why i found her even writing a book like this in the first place pretty distasteful

i know my post would seem less based off of a general distaste for her had i actually read the book, but i must admit that i, too, have no plans of actually reading the book, so take all of this for what you will
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 23, 2017, 08:24:31 PM
Compared with Dotard Rump she is a freaking SAINT.

Sorry

Not discussing addled  old Comrade Sanders anymore either.



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk
Good, then you'll stop embarrassing yourself with regurgitated propaganda.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on September 23, 2017, 08:31:52 PM
Good, then you'll stop embarrassing yourself with regurgitated propaganda.
You're sounding like an old schoolmarm again

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on September 23, 2017, 08:35:23 PM
it was not only calling it that, but even writing it in the first place that i found outrageous for a number of reasons that i don't feel like going into because i just don't like talking about her, but the biggest for me are that:
1 - we were all there and know what happened
2 - i see this as her just seeing another opportunity where she could profit monetarily
3 - the whole victim complex she is trying to adopt behind the book and the 'what happened' title, as if she was robbed of something and we all needed to know what went down

i agree with you that there are a number of reasons that contributed to her downfall, im with you 100% there, but ultimately i feel like the other factors that came into play (and i'm not one that has put much/any stock in all the russian conspiracy stuff) were ones that weren't eternally damning, and ones that better candidates would have been able to overcome, especially in what should have been a 'give-me' election against somebody as ridiculous as trump.

that wasn't the case, and that all comes down to her and her buddies at the DNC ruining everything, and now the country is paying for it, but she'd never say anything like that in a book like this, the blame will lay elsewhere. you of course have the right to feel differently but these are just some of the reasons why i found her even writing a book like this in the first place pretty distasteful

i know my post would seem less based off of a general distaste for her had i actually read the book, but i must admit that i, too, have no plans of actually reading the book, so take all of this for what you will
It sounds very much like you are angry that Secretary Clinton was capable of writing a book whereas Rump can't successfully write even a sentence

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 23, 2017, 08:39:42 PM
You're sounding like an old schoolmarm again

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



lolololol

Most of the time you're weird, but every now and again you nail it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on September 23, 2017, 09:16:58 PM
It sounds very much like you are angry that Secretary Clinton was capable of writing a book whereas Rump can't successfully write even a sentence

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



SG, I'm not sure what you're on about. I'm obviously no fan of Trump but his shortcomings have nothing to do with Hilary's, which was the topic of the post

I was your biggest fan
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 23, 2017, 09:45:29 PM
Writing that book was a smart business decision, and it'll make her a excrement ton of money in book sales and speaking fees.

Also, I don't know what gives people the idea that politicians actually write their own books. You don't just magically become a writer because you're famous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 23, 2017, 10:48:17 PM
Writing that book was a smart business decision, and it'll make her a excrement ton of money in book sales and speaking fees.

Also, I don't know what gives people the idea that politicians actually write their own books. You don't just magically become a writer because you're famous.

That's true, Donald Trump is pretty famous and he's functionally illiterate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on September 23, 2017, 10:50:58 PM
Writing that book was a smart business decision, and it'll make her a excrement ton of money in book sales and speaking fees.

Also, I don't know what gives people the idea that politicians actually write their own books. You don't just magically become a writer because you're famous.
Exactly. Why wouldn't she write a book? There have been so many books written about the election, and about her. Why can't the person who was directly involved on the losing end of it write a book about it?

Of course, she is going to profit off it monetarily, but who cares? It's not like she's divulging state secrets. People like you, who don't like her, aren't her target market anyway.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 24, 2017, 07:44:27 AM
Exactly. Why wouldn't she write a book? There have been so many books written about the election, and about her. Why can't the person who was directly involved on the losing end of it write a book about it?

Of course, she is going to profit off it monetarily, but who cares? It's not like she's divulging state secrets. People like you, who don't like her, aren't her target market anyway.

Nobody “likes” Hillary clinton
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on September 24, 2017, 10:29:36 AM
lolololol

Most of the time you're weird, but every now and again you nail it.

Hahah yep.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on September 24, 2017, 10:47:37 AM
lolololol

Most of the time you're weird, but every now and again you nail it.
Tommyanne hasn't bitched once.  Badgermarm could work for a week or two.

I couldn't care less about her book.  Any reasonably intelligent human knows why we have a cum stain as president.  The truth is the Clintons have given more money to charity than I will ever see.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on September 24, 2017, 11:17:19 AM
Still waiting for the Orange Cumstain to make his $1 million donation to Houston for Harvey


Or Sandy for that matter

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on September 24, 2017, 11:27:50 AM
Hopefully every Jet player, coach and executive takes a stance today against the disgusting SOB in the WH who should be FIRED

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on September 24, 2017, 11:45:45 AM
Hopefully every Jet player, coach and executive takes a stance today against the disgusting SOB in the WH who should be FIRED

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



they probably won't...since their owner works for the Donald.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 24, 2017, 01:14:46 PM
Still waiting for the Orange Cumstain to make his $1 million donation to Houston for Harvey


Or Sandy for that matter

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



How much did you donate?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on September 24, 2017, 01:16:43 PM
How much did you donate?
$200

$200 more than the Orange Dotard

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 24, 2017, 08:29:22 PM
Just FYI, to those who didn't read the book (or look up anything written by anyone who did), yet have opinions about it: Hillary specifically talked about her own mistakes and how they doomed her in the book. She took her own share of the blame, but there were numerous factors that played into the result, and the book looks at the whole picture.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 25, 2017, 05:54:11 PM
Collins joined McCain and Ryan in opposing Graham-Cassidy, which likely kills the bill.

Trump is going to have an aneurysm. Well, we can hope.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 26, 2017, 11:30:48 AM
Collins joined McCain and Ryan in opposing Graham-Cassidy, which likely kills the bill.

Trump is going to have an aneurysm. Well, we can hope.

This is good. But McCain's prognosis is dire. Whoever gets his seat is likely going to be someone the GOP can rely on. That's not good.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 26, 2017, 11:56:31 AM
This is good. But McCain's prognosis is dire. Whoever gets his seat is likely going to be someone the GOP can rely on. That's not good.
Won't matter for this bill.  Reconciliation ends Sept 30.  They'd need 60 votes after that, not just majority.  Unless McCain kicks the bucket this week.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 26, 2017, 12:02:24 PM
Won't matter for this bill.  Reconciliation ends Sept 30.  They'd need 60 votes after that, not just majority.  Unless McCain kicks the bucket this week.

Until next year.

Which is why I'm surprised they even tried this now. They could be pushing through their tax bill, which they could at least paint as helping the middle class. All while ignoring Americans who are starving and have no water or electricity. Then next year they can pursue their hellbent push to gut "that guy's" healthcare plan.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 26, 2017, 12:21:35 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/bevhillsantifa/status/912411161915559936


Good excrement, 2017. Good excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 26, 2017, 12:23:26 PM


Until next year.

Which is why I'm surprised they even tried this now. They could be pushing through their tax bill, which they could at least paint as helping the middle class. All while ignoring Americans who are starving and have no water or electricity. Then next year they can pursue their hellbent push to gut "that guy's" healthcare plan.

Won't they have to put this tax reform in 2018's reconciliation process?  No way in hell they could do both taxes and healtchcare in 2018 reconciliation from what I've read.  Admittedly I'm no expert.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 26, 2017, 12:36:38 PM

Won't they have to put this tax reform in 2018's reconciliation process?  No way in hell they could do both taxes and healtchcare in 2018 reconciliation from what I've read.  Admittedly I'm no expert.

I don't know if the tax reform even needs the reconciliation process to pass. I'm certainly no expert either, but I would think a tax plan would be a lot easier to get moving than the healthcare fight. Like I said, they could paint a tax plan as beneficial to the middle-class, even if it serves the rich better. It would almost certainly not meet the same resistance as ACA repeal.

From a strategic standpoint, I'd think it would make more sense to hold off repeal until next year when they'd possibly have McCain's vote. It would be playing dirty, but at the end of the day, every facet of Washington is playing dirty.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 26, 2017, 01:31:55 PM
McConnell admitted defeat and pulled the vote on the healthcare bill. Trump is stomping his angry little feet about "so-called Republicans" which is brilliantly hypocritical, but unsurprising for someone with such a tenuous grip on things like truth, reality and history.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on September 26, 2017, 01:35:15 PM
every time Trump loses, an angel gets its wings.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 26, 2017, 01:43:57 PM
every time Trump loses, a little bit of Tommy dies inside.

FTFY
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 26, 2017, 02:04:02 PM
I'd argue if I could.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 26, 2017, 02:09:40 PM
I'd argue if I could.

Have you given up on him yet?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 26, 2017, 02:17:36 PM
Have you given up on him yet?

Nah, I just don't care. I like the drama.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 26, 2017, 04:40:43 PM
But the market doe
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 27, 2017, 04:59:59 PM
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/09/28/antifa-leader-teacher-yvonne-felarca-arrested-at-empathy-tent-berkeley-brawl.html

Quote
David Marquis, who identified himself as a senior at the school, said he was tired of the protests on campus. Marquis was outside the protest area and described the scene.

“If you look at them, it’s ridiculous,” Marquis told the Los Angeles Times. “You’ve got a guy with purple hair with a f---ing lightsaber talking about Hitler. It’s hard for me to take any of this seriously.”

Quote made me laugh.

I would like to put in a request for an "empathy tent" at the next tailgate.  Sometimes we need to calm our emotions and relax after the stress of yelling and calling opposing fans fags.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 28, 2017, 10:09:17 AM
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/352824-trump-administration-forcing-puerto-rico-evacuees-to-pay-for
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 28, 2017, 10:55:12 AM
The President of the United States is a piece of excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on September 28, 2017, 11:38:48 AM
The President of the United States is a piece of excrement.

He's just misunderstood.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 28, 2017, 12:20:17 PM
He's just misunderstood.

You're thinking of Dr Pepper. Common mistake.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 28, 2017, 02:22:46 PM
You're thinking of Dr Pepper. Common mistake.
No, Trump is Fanta. Orange and vaguely associated with Nazis.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 28, 2017, 08:58:58 PM
You're thinking of Dr Pepper. Common mistake.

Dr Pepper could not be any grosser if they tried
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 28, 2017, 09:20:04 PM
http://thehill.com/homenews/administration/352824-trump-administration-forcing-puerto-rico-evacuees-to-pay-for

Fake News

http://www.snopes.com/is-the-trump-administration-puerto-rico-evacuees/

Trump also waived that law people were bitching about (the Wilson act or whatever) to further help out Puerto Rico.

I have no idea how the government response to PR is, but the two biggest criticisms from the left so far have turned out to be pure bullshit.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on September 29, 2017, 02:48:16 AM
Fake News

http://www.snopes.com/is-the-trump-administration-puerto-rico-evacuees/

Trump also waived that law people were bitching about (the Wilson act or whatever) to further help out Puerto Rico.

I have no idea how the government response to PR is, but the two biggest criticisms from the left so far have turned out to be pure bullshit.
Its the Jones Act and took the Buttplug a week to suspend it for PR and USVI vs minutes for his very fine KKK states of TX and FL (actually way longer as PR and USVI were both also crushed by two previous hurricanes)

And he and stilettos rushed down to TX and FL for self serving photo ops almost immediately but not to PR or VI until next week..

"I just found out they are islands, in an ocean, a really big ocean, really big and wet and salty too! Believe me! Very salty"

Time to face facts, dcm.

Rump doesn't give a crap about those 4 million American Citizens, many of whom are brownish and speak Spanish. Probably didn't know they were Anerican Citizens until 3 days ago.

In other words, he is a massive Dotard

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 29, 2017, 07:37:24 AM
How is Puerto Rico not fixed already??!1?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 29, 2017, 08:28:30 AM
From what I've read, the issue isn't getting supplies to Puerto Rico, it's getting the supplies that are already there dispersed throughout the country.  I don't think temporarily waiving the Jones Act will help, although it's a nice gesture.  They need help getting supplies and aid dispersed within the country that's already sitting at the docks.  The roads are messed up badly.

Apparently the issue with the Jones Act being waived quickly in TX and FL is because they had the capacity to handle the extra vessels.  Puerto Rico didn't have the capacity to handle it so it wouldn't do good to send a excrement ton of ships that can't dock.  At least that's what I've read.  Obviously I'm no shipping expert.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on September 29, 2017, 09:46:42 AM
My side needs to learn not to swing for the fences everytime.

Trump brought the criticism on himself, but that's normal.  He was ignoring the issue.

However, FEMA was at least somewhat prepared, and got supplies there as soon as the weather cooperated.  And in a backwards way the administration deserves a little credit for that.

PR should have been declared a federal disaster area a day before the storm hit.  Instead, Trump was just douching excrement up.

Not fake news.

The problem now is they need truck drivers.  Well, by now I mean they have needed them for days.  I think the military might have a couple...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on September 29, 2017, 09:47:20 AM
Dr Pepper could not be any grosser if they tried
Fake news.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 29, 2017, 10:53:53 AM
Fake news.

Debating banning him for such a disgraceful and offensive statement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 29, 2017, 12:06:51 PM
Debating banning him for such a disgraceful and offensive statement.

I would rather be banned than live in a world where people think Dr Pepper is drinkable
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 29, 2017, 01:30:38 PM
Dr Pepper could not be any grosser if they tried

There are things you say that I don't agree with. This statement borders on fighting words.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on September 29, 2017, 02:08:28 PM
I second the Dr Pepper being disgusting comment.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on September 29, 2017, 03:30:33 PM
I second the Dr Pepper being disgusting comment.

I can forgive you for voting for Trump but I just don't think I can forgive this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 29, 2017, 03:48:27 PM
Tom Price resigned. The swamp isn't so much draining as it is overflowing, with so many new people in there grifting the taxpayer there just isn't room for them all and they're getting pushed over the side.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 29, 2017, 03:51:06 PM
I think Tommy needs to contact Trump about a job.  Secretary of Titties sounds good.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 29, 2017, 03:52:50 PM
I think Tommy needs to contact Trump about a job.  Secretary of Titties sounds good.

Director of hoo-ha Grabbing
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 05, 2017, 02:24:11 PM
The NRA have apparently said that they would support legislation outlawing the sale of bump stocks.

I wonder how many bump stock manufacturers contribute significant money to the NRA's lobbying efforts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 06, 2017, 12:12:30 PM
https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2017/10/06/bank-behind-fearless-girl-statute-fined-5m-for-underpaying-women-and-minorities/#176bbca76909

Yeah, I lol’d
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 06, 2017, 01:11:47 PM
The NRA have apparently said that they would support legislation outlawing the sale of bump stocks.

I wonder how many bump stock manufacturers contribute significant money to the NRA's lobbying efforts.


http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/05/politics/bump-stocks-regulation-atf-las-vegas/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 06, 2017, 01:33:28 PM
https://www.forbes.com/sites/eriksherman/2017/10/06/bank-behind-fearless-girl-statute-fined-5m-for-underpaying-women-and-minorities/#176bbca76909

Yeah, I lol’d

Ha. This is why I hate when corporations get involved in social issues. The buy-side is overwhelmingly male so it's no surprise that if you compare average salaries between the two groups that you'll find a disparity. Having spoken to many many many asset managers of large and small institutional investment firms, I can tell you that women just aren't a good fit, and unless the candidate is some sort of finance genius she'll always lose the job to a man regardless of her experience. Blame all those frivolous sexual harassment lawsuits, their emotional mood swings that affects their ability to manage a portfolio, or the fact that they just don't have the stamina to handle the demands of being a trader.

Before Puck jumps in, I'm speaking more of equity trading not bonds. Not sure what the female makeup is on that side since it's less volatile.

Anyway, you'll see more women in investment banking since that's more project management and marketing, coupled with finance of course, than securities trading.

Anyone who's in the industry knows that the statue is such a pathetic attempt at positive PR. freak outa here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 06, 2017, 01:39:50 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/05/politics/bump-stocks-regulation-atf-las-vegas/index.html

The most telling part of this is that Congress passes laws without knowing a damn thing about what they're doing. That goes for both sides. How the freak can the Democrats call for reform without even knowing that these things exists, and the Republicans defend the bill without even knowing these things exist? It's their fuckn job.

Par for the course I guess.

Quote
"Look, I didn't even know what they were until this week, and I'm an avid sportsman," the Wisconsin Republican said in a clip of the interview that aired Thursday. "So, I think we're quickly coming up to speed with what this is. Fully automatic weapons have been banned for a long time. Apparently this allows you to take a semiautomatic and turn it into a fully automatic so clearly that's something we need to look into."

No, that's not an excuse. Congress is responsible for legislation, so how can you effectively legislate when you don't even know much about the industry you're trying to regulate?

Now we're going to have a bill specifically banning bump sticks and everyone will pay themselves on the back.

Typical.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on October 06, 2017, 01:42:51 PM
On the municipal end there are quite a few female muni traders. I don't know the percentages but the company I worked for it was close to 50/50. However, in the bigger company I worked for it was more of 85/15.

I did do business with quite few buy-side women on the fixed income side. For the most part, they were really cool, I got along well with them. There was nothing in their DNA which made them any less capable at their jobs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 06, 2017, 01:47:17 PM
On the municipal end there are quite a few female muni traders. I don't know the percentages but the company I worked for it was close to 50/50. However, in the bigger company I worked for it was more of 85/15. I did do business with quite few buyside women. For the most part, they were really cool, I got along well with them.

Yeah, that makes sense. Probably the most female-friendly derivative. I've sold to investment management firms (mostly equity but corporate HY and distressed debt for a few years) and rarely ever interacted with a woman who wasn't an analyst.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on October 06, 2017, 01:49:30 PM
What makes the black dudes not as good for the job? Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 06, 2017, 01:53:42 PM
Funnily enough workplace demographics are actually very useful from a salesperson's perspective. Women will almost always spend a few seconds more on the phone to help you find the right person but won't introduce them herself, never. Men are the opposite. Also, women are going to haggle way more and will very rarely be the one to be the champion for the service. I always thought it was because they subconsciously don't want to seem like they're spending the company's money willy nilly and perpetuate the stereotype. Likely an unconscious move, but people do notice.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 06, 2017, 01:59:02 PM
What makes the black dudes not as good for the job? Lol

Low pool of candidates. Also, many of these jobs are in very high demand so a major factor is connections and people you know. If there aren't many African Americans studying finance in good schools in the first place, then it'll be tough for them to make those connections and network enough to get themselves in the door. Nothing to do with racism.

I've seen way more blacks in Wealth Management, where you can still make a excrement load of money, but they usually have to work their way up like others who aren't part of the "bro network".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on October 06, 2017, 02:16:43 PM
What makes the black dudes not as good for the job? Lol

I know a black guy that had his own fixed income shop and did very well getting deals because they needed (x) amount of minority dealers involved in new issuance. That said, he is one of the biggest assholes I have ever met in my life. It isn't just me, the next person that says a good thing about him will be the first. Now I won't dispute his intelligence, I am pretty sure he's smart, he just deserves to be beaten to an inch of his life.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 06, 2017, 10:23:21 PM
Joe Biden misses the old days when you could just chill with segregationist Democrats like it was nbd.

https://twitter.com/JStein_Vox/status/916420535692742656
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on October 08, 2017, 08:29:16 AM
What makes the black dudes not as good for the job? Lol
They get periods and don't have the stamina.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 08, 2017, 09:15:32 AM

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/05/politics/bump-stocks-regulation-atf-las-vegas/index.html

Whose gonna trust CNN on this one

https://www.google.com/amp/www.theblaze.com/news/2017/10/07/cnn-mocked-with-hilarious-reaction-for-showing-rifle-with-grenade-launcher-while-talking-bump-stocks/amp/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on October 08, 2017, 09:21:56 AM
Whose gonna trust CNN on this one

https://www.google.com/amp/www.theblaze.com/news/2017/10/07/cnn-mocked-with-hilarious-reaction-for-showing-rifle-with-grenade-launcher-while-talking-bump-stocks/amp/
Does anyone watch cnn anymore?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 08, 2017, 09:43:01 AM
Does anyone watch cnn anymore?

Ratings have been way down, MASSIVELY, since trump took them down. By that I mean when he RT’d that WWE meme of him spearing them. RIP CNN
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 09, 2017, 08:58:09 PM
I can barely remember the last time this strategy failed.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171010/1be7263a228ee655e5fdcc427121ff7f.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on October 10, 2017, 09:47:10 AM
I can barely remember the last time this strategy failed.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171010/1be7263a228ee655e5fdcc427121ff7f.png)
Democrats and winning strategy don't mix well.

Let the super pacs run ads that attack the opponent, with borderline lies if necessary, early and often.  Beat the republicans at their own game.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 12, 2017, 12:54:25 PM
The US has pulled out of UNESCO.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 12, 2017, 01:14:51 PM
The US has pulled out of UNESCO.
SUCK IT GLOBALIST LIBS
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 12, 2017, 03:55:30 PM
The US has pulled out of UNESCO.

This isn't that surprising. We've pulled out of UNESCO before (back in 1984) and only rejoined in 2003 under Bush. The Obama administration also pulled funding in 2011 after they admitted Palestine as a member. The organization isn't exactly the shining beacon of the UN.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 17, 2017, 08:34:27 PM
Stay classy, Georgia.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/all/georgia-gop-candidate-holds-rapid-fire-bump-stock-giveaway-contest-n811451
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 18, 2017, 05:23:09 AM
Stay classy, Georgia.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/all/georgia-gop-candidate-holds-rapid-fire-bump-stock-giveaway-contest-n811451

Jesus fuckn Christ. I can't even.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 19, 2017, 11:34:41 AM
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/elections/amp/shakeup-democratic-national-committee-longtime-officials-ousted-n812126
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on October 19, 2017, 12:09:17 PM
The DNC should get together and write a book: How to Repeatedly Lose Elections to the Most Unelectable Individuals Ever Presented in the History of American Politics: a Field Guide.

It would be the one thing they could all consistently stay on-message about.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 24, 2017, 02:35:26 PM
I can't decide if this is a relief or a disappointment.

http://www.cnn.com/2017/10/24/politics/kid-rock-announces-hes-not-actually-running-for-senate/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 30, 2017, 06:27:32 AM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nAmHOTxXbc0

Lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on October 30, 2017, 01:37:37 PM
Hahahahaha Jesus just take the ticket and go.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 30, 2017, 01:44:50 PM
The panic attack could very well be real, and I've no idea why the poster decided to put PTSD in the title. Panic attacks can happen to anyone at any time for any reason, especially when that person is under a lot of stress.

What I do have an issue with is people trying to use their position to claim that the law should somehow apply differently to them, and dropping names in order to wriggle out from beneath its consequences. That alone should render them unfit for the office they hold, be they other cops or elected officials, regardless of their political alignments.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on October 30, 2017, 03:14:30 PM
I have no problem with trying to wrangle out of a ticket. We have all done it and you bet your sweet derriere I would use anyone possible to get out of the ticket.

However, I would use it in a conversation and not in a threatening nor crazy manner. This lady is clearly freaking nuts and using her position in a nutty manner. Absolutely give her the ticket so she can stick it in her poopchute.

Getting out of tickets is like a sales call. Half the fun is trying to make a sale.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 30, 2017, 06:21:41 PM
The panic attack could very well be real, and I've no idea why the poster decided to put PTSD in the title. Panic attacks can happen to anyone at any time for any reason, especially when that person is under a lot of stress.

What I do have an issue with is people trying to use their position to claim that the law should somehow apply differently to them, and dropping names in order to wriggle out from beneath its consequences. That alone should render them unfit for the office they hold, be they other cops or elected officials, regardless of their political alignments.

Because she said “I have PTSD”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 30, 2017, 07:06:33 PM
Because she said “I have PTSD”

I missed that but then I quickly tuned out her shrieking. Still, maybe she does - I have no idea what she's gone through in her life. I'm not going to criticise someone for having a panic attack.

Neither PTSD nor a panic attack is an excuse for using the "do you know who I am and who I know?" defense, which I find far more offensive.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 02, 2017, 06:37:52 AM
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774

Donna Brazile airing dirty laundry from the DNC. Odd since she's considered a Clinton loyalist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 02, 2017, 07:31:25 AM
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774

Donna Brazile airing dirty laundry from the DNC. Odd since she's considered a Clinton loyalist.
That reads very much like a piece of complete fiction. She's basically blaming every single person but herself; I'm not for a moment pretending that Clinton, Wasserman-Schulz or anyone else have clean hands, but this isn't a very credible smoking gun.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 02, 2017, 07:59:41 AM
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774

Donna Brazile airing dirty laundry from the DNC. Odd since she's considered a Clinton loyalist.

It'll be interesting to see how much of this is true.  Sucks for Bernie.  I do wonder why she's bringing this out now.  Seems that it's part of her book release and would certainly help with sales.  I just wonder why she's airing this out at all.  Maybe she knows it will eventually come out and was trying to get ahead of it and paint herself in a good light. 

I agree with JE that Donna Brazile probably isn't the angel she pretends to be.  I don't think this is pure fiction though.  Just my opinion but I bet it's mostly the truth.  She sure is going to look horrible if it is made up. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 02, 2017, 08:25:41 AM
What a sham, how is any of that even possible?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 02, 2017, 08:55:23 AM
I wasted five minutes reading that self serving drivel. That woman sounds so full of excrement, it's coming out of her eyeballs. It reads like a total fabrication. She tries way too hard to make herself look honest. Lol it's always people like that, that are lying through their teeth. Always......
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 02, 2017, 09:17:30 AM
That reads very much like a piece of complete fiction. She's basically blaming every single person but herself; I'm not for a moment pretending that Clinton, Wasserman-Schulz or anyone else have clean hands, but this isn't a very credible smoking gun.

It does read like "Everyone but Bernie and me suck!" And she even kind of threw Bernie under the bus at the end.

However much truth is in her story, the part that bothers me the most is not the corruption, but the sheer waste of money within the DNC. This is exactly how racists get to take control of the country. The alternative is a bunch of headless chickens running around setting piles of cash on fire.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 02, 2017, 09:26:29 AM
It does read like "Everyone but Bernie and me suck!" And she even kind of threw Bernie under the bus at the end.

However much truth is in her story, the part that bothers me the most is not the corruption, but the sheer waste of money within the DNC. This is exactly how racists get to take control of the country. The alternative is a bunch of headless chickens running around setting piles of cash on fire.

South Park: Douchebag vs. Turd Sandwich
2017: Headless chickens running around setting piles of cash on fire vs. racists
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 02, 2017, 09:37:56 AM
I do agree that Donna Brazile is really embellishing her role in the story.  The question is whether the rest of it aside from her is true.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 02, 2017, 11:45:07 AM
House tax plan is out.  While I know this isn't the final product, they are likely going to be increasing taxes on an unexpected group:  Middle class families with 2 or more kids that itemize (i.e. have a mortgage).  The killer for these people is the elimination of personal exemptions.  That more than offsets any increase in standard deduction or child tax credits. 

While I'm sure the GOP doesn't care about tax increases in blue states, I don't think it's a good idea to have a tax increase to fairly typical families in the middle class when that is what you are claiming to be helping. 

It's early, so maybe I'm missing something, but the elimination of personal exemptions is getting little attention compared to all the flashy changes.

Hopefully there will be some blowback from people with kids and mortgages seeing that it's not exactly a small population of people.  I can't imagine they don't tweak something to make up for this gap.  It's probably going to get changed quite a bit, if it even passes at all.

EDIT:  I think I underestimated the offsetting effect of the lower tax bracket rates.  We'll see.  My bet is it doesn't pass anyway.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 02, 2017, 03:55:07 PM
House tax plan is out.  While I know this isn't the final product, they are likely going to be increasing taxes on an unexpected group:  Middle class families with 2 or more kids that itemize (i.e. have a mortgage).  The killer for these people is the elimination of personal exemptions.  That more than offsets any increase in standard deduction or child tax credits. 

While I'm sure the GOP doesn't care about tax increases in blue states, I don't think it's a good idea to have a tax increase to fairly typical families in the middle class when that is what you are claiming to be helping. 

It's early, so maybe I'm missing something, but the elimination of personal exemptions is getting little attention compared to all the flashy changes.

Hopefully there will be some blowback from people with kids and mortgages seeing that it's not exactly a small population of people.  I can't imagine they don't tweak something to make up for this gap.  It's probably going to get changed quite a bit, if it even passes at all.

EDIT:  I think I underestimated the offsetting effect of the lower tax bracket rates.  We'll see.  My bet is it doesn't pass anyway.
It's a test to see how badly people will shoot themselves in the dick if they're told it'll pee off liberals.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on November 02, 2017, 06:33:42 PM
Bin Laden was a shitposter

https://www.cia.gov/news-information/press-releases-statements/2017-press-releases-statements/cia-releases-additional-files-recovered-in-ubl-compound-raid.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 02, 2017, 09:09:20 PM
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 02, 2017, 09:18:49 PM
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774

Scroll up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 02, 2017, 10:19:59 PM
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/11/02/clinton-brazile-hacks-2016-215774
Beginning to think dcm and Sarah Huckabuck both think Hillary Clinton is the POTUS

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Ignatius J Reilly on November 03, 2017, 12:55:52 AM
That reads very much like a piece of complete fiction. She's basically blaming every single person but herself; I'm not for a moment pretending that Clinton, Wasserman-Schulz or anyone else have clean hands, but this isn't a very credible smoking gun.

It's honestly not far from what I'd suspect to be true.  My biggest issue is Brazile trying to distance herself from a situation in which she was likely more complicit than she admits.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on November 03, 2017, 05:54:09 AM
It'll be interesting to see how much of this is true.  Sucks for Bernie.  I do wonder why she's bringing this out now.  Seems that it's part of her book release and would certainly help with sales.  I just wonder why she's airing this out at all.  Maybe she knows it will eventually come out and was trying to get ahead of it and paint herself in a good light. 

I agree with JE that Donna Brazile probably isn't the angel she pretends to be.  I don't think this is pure fiction though.  Just my opinion but I bet it's mostly the truth.  She sure is going to look horrible if it is made up. 

She's doing it because a solid 25% of the country will eat up anything that says the DNC is more evil than the racists they vote for. NY times bestseller list here she comes!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 03, 2017, 07:25:34 AM
She's doing it because a solid 25% of the country will eat up anything that says the DNC is more evil than the racists they vote for. NY times bestseller list here she comes!

Dear lord that excerpt was enough to make the determination that I would rather read the entire instruction manual for a new car.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 03, 2017, 08:41:31 AM
It's honestly not far from what I'd suspect to be true.  My biggest issue is Brazile trying to distance herself from a situation in which she was likely more complicit than she admits.
She definitely was more aware than she lets on. I'm not giving her a pass but her story validates what many suspected about the DNC.

I should have just posted the relevant excerpts because everyone seems to be getting hung up on how much DB sucks and not the real story.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 03, 2017, 09:28:57 AM
FWIW, someone on Twitter challenged her to provide actual evidence because supposedly the evidence she's quoting is actually from 2012.

Bigger than this story though is that the DNC is a complete shitshow and if they don't get it figured out soon, the GOP is going to have a stranglehold on every branch of every level of this country.

Like them or loathe them, the GOP is far better at running cohesively than the Dems.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 03, 2017, 09:51:59 AM
House tax plan is out.  While I know this isn't the final product, they are likely going to be increasing taxes on an unexpected group:  Middle class families with 2 or more kids that itemize (i.e. have a mortgage).  The killer for these people is the elimination of personal exemptions.  That more than offsets any increase in standard deduction or child tax credits. 

While I'm sure the GOP doesn't care about tax increases in blue states, I don't think it's a good idea to have a tax increase to fairly typical families in the middle class when that is what you are claiming to be helping. 

It's early, so maybe I'm missing something, but the elimination of personal exemptions is getting little attention compared to all the flashy changes.

Hopefully there will be some blowback from people with kids and mortgages seeing that it's not exactly a small population of people.  I can't imagine they don't tweak something to make up for this gap.  It's probably going to get changed quite a bit, if it even passes at all.

EDIT:  I think I underestimated the offsetting effect of the lower tax bracket rates.  We'll see.  My bet is it doesn't pass anyway.
But, you can do your taxes on a post card personally kissed by Donald Trump.

That must be a gif by now.  How can I not find it?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on November 03, 2017, 11:54:52 AM
FWIW, someone on Twitter challenged her to provide actual evidence because supposedly the evidence she's quoting is actually from 2012.

Bigger than this story though is that the DNC is a complete shitshow and if they don't get it figured out soon, the GOP is going to have a stranglehold on every branch of every level of this country.

Like them or loathe them, the GOP is far better at running cohesively than the Dems.

The only elections the DNC will be winning will be purely because of how terrible Trump is. They could do nothing and everything would probably go better for them than whatever they actually do next year.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 03, 2017, 02:14:24 PM
The only elections the DNC will be winning will be purely because of how terrible Trump is. They could do nothing and everything would probably go better for them than whatever they actually do next year.

I think that's symptomatic of the problem. Conservatives turn out in large numbers to support their own belief structures. Liberals just stay home.

What makes the GOP successful is that they understand their constituencies' beliefs and they cater to them. The Democrats don't seem to understand that their constituents have a huge spectrum of beliefs and that many of them conflict. So the Democrats rely on saying "You need to vote so that the other guy doesn't win!" So disillusioned Dems stay home because no one is "looking out for them anyway."

As a party, the Democrats are spineless and refuse to take a stand on anything. Campaigning on "We're not Trump" is going to lose them the midterms. They need new leadership immediately. Young leadership, at that. They need to stand for things that will make millennials get up early or stop on the way home from work to cast their vote. Right now, they don't have that. Just watch how many Republicans win their races on Tuesday.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 03, 2017, 05:04:06 PM
I think that's symptomatic of the problem. Conservatives turn out in large numbers to support their own belief structures. Liberals just stay home.

If they supported a conservative belief structure they would have nominated an actual conservative. They just do better showing up for the guy with the (R).

Quote
What makes the GOP successful is that they understand their constituencies' beliefs and they pander to them.

Slightly FTFY
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 04, 2017, 06:10:54 PM
Rand Paul assaulted at his home in Kentucky, suffers minor injury.

George Soros strikes again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 05, 2017, 12:16:55 PM
I think that's symptomatic of the problem. Conservatives turn out in large numbers to support their own belief structures. Liberals just stay home.

What makes the GOP successful is that they understand their constituencies' beliefs and they cater to them. The Democrats don't seem to understand that their constituents have a huge spectrum of beliefs and that many of them conflict. So the Democrats rely on saying "You need to vote so that the other guy doesn't win!" So disillusioned Dems stay home because no one is "looking out for them anyway."

As a party, the Democrats are spineless and refuse to take a stand on anything. Campaigning on "We're not Trump" is going to lose them the midterms. They need new leadership immediately. Young leadership, at that. They need to stand for things that will make millennials get up early or stop on the way home from work to cast their vote. Right now, they don't have that. Just watch how many Republicans win their races on Tuesday.
I disagree to a point.  The Dems are pretty solid when it comes to womens rights and gun control.

They need to stop talking about both.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 06, 2017, 07:25:52 PM
Big unions in New York are spending mega money to defeat this constitutional convention. The thoughts of losing their billions in guaranteed pension money they're stealing from the tax payer is just too much
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 06, 2017, 07:49:21 PM
Big unions in New York are spending mega money to defeat this constitutional convention. The thoughts of losing their billions in guaranteed pension money they're stealing from the tax payer is just too much

You are without a shadow of doubt he dumbest poster here, every time you post you make us dumber.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 06, 2017, 07:51:44 PM
You are without a shadow of doubt he dumbest poster here, every time you post you make us dumber.

https://www.google.com/amp/nypost.com/2017/11/03/public-employee-unions-make-last-ditch-push-to-kill-constitutional-convention/amp/

You should try posting things that require more thought than sg3
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 06, 2017, 08:00:03 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/nypost.com/2017/11/03/public-employee-unions-make-last-ditch-push-to-kill-constitutional-convention/amp/

You should try posting things that require more thought than sg3
Why are you involving me in your stupid posts, you moronic  pile of garbage



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 06, 2017, 08:06:40 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/nypost.com/2017/11/03/public-employee-unions-make-last-ditch-push-to-kill-constitutional-convention/amp/

You should try posting things that require more thought than sg3
Ah yes Trump loving dummy

Post garbage from the Trump.loving garbage rag NY Post to support your halfwit pointless point

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 06, 2017, 08:17:53 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/nypost.com/2017/11/03/public-employee-unions-make-last-ditch-push-to-kill-constitutional-convention/amp/ (https://www.google.com/amp/nypost.com/2017/11/03/public-employee-unions-make-last-ditch-push-to-kill-constitutional-convention/amp/)

You should try posting things that require more thought than sg3

So your dumbassed retort to me is to quote a completely biased article, keep at it you dimwitted fucktard.

Edit: To even call that an article is beyond generous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 06, 2017, 08:19:40 PM
So your completely dumbassed retort to me is to quote a completely biased article, keep at it you dimwitted fucktard.

Yes its biased, but theyre posting objective numbers  which was what my comments were about. The unions are spending a freak ton of money to protect their bloated pensions. Biased or not the article supports that with specific numbers.

Vs your comments which are basically completely hur durrr. You might as well just start spurring Fuehrer Trumps orange lolol every post.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 06, 2017, 08:28:58 PM
Yes its biased, but theyre posting objective numbers  which was what my comments were about. The unions are spending a freak ton of money to protect their bloated pensions. Biased or not the article supports that with specific numbers.

Vs your comments which are basically completely hur durrr. You might as well just start spurring Fuehrer Trumps orange lolol every post.

My comments are pointing out how freaking stupid you are. You have been on this site since inception and it seems like you get dumber by the day. It's beyond annoying. You make comments on subjects continually you know absolutely nothing about as if what you're saying is fact. Do us all a favor and stop posting until you have at least a cursory understanding of facts.

You just said the following you fucktard: "Yes it's a completely biased article I am quoting. I am going to quote it anyway because it has numbers...blah blah blah bloated pension.".

STFU you moron
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 06, 2017, 08:31:40 PM
My comments are pointing out how freaking stupid you are. You have been on this site since inception and it seems like you get dumber by the day. It's beyond annoying. You make comments on subjects continually you know absolutely nothing about as if what you're saying is fact. Do us all a favor and stop posting until you have at least a cursory understanding of facts.

You just said the following you fucktard: "Yes it's a completely biased article I am quoting. I am going to quote it anyway because it has numbers...blah blah blah bloated pension.".

STFU you moron

Im sorry I forgot to use unbiased articles like everybody else does.

You are seriously such a miserable freak.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 06, 2017, 08:35:07 PM
Im sorry I forgot to use unbiased articles like everybody else does.

You are seriously such a miserable freak.

I don't quote biased articles as fact, you halfwit. I also don't post on subjects when I don't know what I am talking about, which you consistently do, then again you don't know much.

 I can't stand stupid and you are stupid, so if I seem miserable it's because you're an idiot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 06, 2017, 10:23:43 PM
If the article is based on fact then puck will
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 06, 2017, 11:06:56 PM
If the article is based on fact then puck will

DCM's brother
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on November 07, 2017, 03:12:58 AM
Hey guys!!!! DCM didn't vote for Trump so his opinion is pure.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 07, 2017, 05:29:16 AM
If the article is based on fact then puck will
will what?



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 07, 2017, 06:09:06 AM
will what?



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk
Yes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 07, 2017, 07:06:15 AM
If the article is based on fact then puck will

Breed tub!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 07, 2017, 07:16:17 AM
I knew dcm would be pro-convention before he even posted about it. And probably Tommy because he's always in favor of doing something vs nothing.

It's not gonna pass, there's strong bipartisan opposition to it, and any possible benefits are far outweighed by the risks, not to mention the costs of simply holding the convention.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 07, 2017, 07:16:37 AM
No on 1
Yes on 2
Yes on 3
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 07, 2017, 08:17:44 AM
No on 1
Yes on 2
Yes on 3

FYI All, This is the combo that gets Trump impeached
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 07, 2017, 08:51:40 AM
FYI All, This is the combo that gets Trump impeached
No, that's up up down down left right left right B A.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 07, 2017, 01:26:26 PM
No on 1
Yes on 2
Yes on 3
I think that is how I voted, tho I might have gone No on 3

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 07, 2017, 01:40:39 PM
Forgive my foreigner ignorance, but what is a Constitution Convention and why would you not want one?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 07, 2017, 01:45:27 PM
Forgive my foreigner ignorance, but what is a Constitution Convention and why would you not want one?
This one is more or less an attempt by the Governor to do a Scott Walker revocation of public employee pensions negotiated over the years in collective bargaining between the two parties.



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 07, 2017, 02:03:39 PM
(https://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/nerds-talent-show.gif?w=650&h=384)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 07, 2017, 02:10:46 PM
(https://uproxx.files.wordpress.com/2014/07/nerds-talent-show.gif?w=650&h=384)


"Clap your hands everybody, everybody clap your hands.  We're lambda lambda lambda and, omega mu...we're all here, to put on a show for you. We got Poindexter on the violin, and Gilbert/Louis will be joining in...."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 07, 2017, 02:13:59 PM
Forgive my foreigner ignorance, but what is a Constitution Convention and why would you not want one?

It would be a gathering of representatives who would then be tasked with rewriting the state constitution of New York. I think I read that the last time something like this happened was 1957.

It's being opposed by groups from both sides of the aisle because it would leave a wide open hole for special interest groups to have a big hand in the redesign of the state constitution. Obviously, neither side wants that influence coming from the opposite side.

I'm against it because I'd rather stick with the evil I know. Sure, there are special interests in Albany, but they can only affect small change at any given time. With the ability to help reshape the entire state constitution, I worry what that would result in.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 07, 2017, 02:22:58 PM
"Clap your hands everybody, everybody clap your hands.  We're lambda lambda lambda and, omega mu...we're all here, to put on a show for you. We got Poindexter on the violin, and Gilbert/Louis will be joining in...."
No on 15!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 07, 2017, 03:11:03 PM
It would be a gathering of representatives who would then be tasked with rewriting the state constitution of New York. I think I read that the last time something like this happened was 1957.

It's being opposed by groups from both sides of the aisle because it would leave a wide open hole for special interest groups to have a big hand in the redesign of the state constitution. Obviously, neither side wants that influence coming from the opposite side.

I'm against it because I'd rather stick with the evil I know. Sure, there are special interests in Albany, but they can only affect small change at any given time. With the ability to help reshape the entire state constitution, I worry what that would result in.

Gotcha, thanks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 07, 2017, 04:09:58 PM
It would be a gathering of representatives who would then be tasked with rewriting the state constitution of New York. I think I read that the last time something like this happened was 1957.

It's being opposed by groups from both sides of the aisle because it would leave a wide open hole for special interest groups to have a big hand in the redesign of the state constitution. Obviously, neither side wants that influence coming from the opposite side.

I'm against it because I'd rather stick with the evil I know. Sure, there are special interests in Albany, but they can only affect small change at any given time. With the ability to help reshape the entire state constitution, I worry what that would result in.
Basically this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 07, 2017, 04:11:15 PM
I think that is how I voted, tho I might have gone No on 3

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk
3 isn't hugely consequential but I have some ties in the Adirondacks that make it seem like a decent proposal. I won't be heartbroken if it doesn't pass.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 07, 2017, 06:52:45 PM
It would be a gathering of representatives who would then be tasked with rewriting the state constitution of New York. I think I read that the last time something like this happened was 1957.

It's being opposed by groups from both sides of the aisle because it would leave a wide open hole for special interest groups to have a big hand in the redesign of the state constitution. Obviously, neither side wants that influence coming from the opposite side.

I'm against it because I'd rather stick with the evil I know. Sure, there are special interests in Albany, but they can only affect small change at any given time. With the ability to help reshape the entire state constitution, I worry what that would result in.

Thank you, taxes are high enough can you imagine if they raided pensions and had to pay it back? We will be fucked. Anyway I don't have a pension but see the danger.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 07, 2017, 09:26:38 PM
Update

Democrat Phil Murphy wins NJ Gov race to replace Fat boy Christie

Democrat Ralph Northram wins VA Gov race over Trump diehard Ed Gillespie

VA Legislature will probably flip blue

Trump response to the voters rebuking him and his nominees.

Tweeted from Korea

"Not my fault at all. Gillespie lost because he didn't embrace me and my positions"

Tillerson was more than right about Trump being "a FU*KING MORON

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 08, 2017, 07:10:05 AM
And here in New York State

Prop 1 for a Convention to "Scott Walker" pensions agreed to thru collective bargaining was apparently only supported by 4 voters, the 3 Koch Bros  and dcm since it got clobbered in every county in the State..downstate, upstate, city, suburbs, rural ALL

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 08, 2017, 07:21:36 AM
And here in New York State

Prop 1 for a Convention to "Scott Walker" pensions agreed to thru collective bargaining was apparently only supported by 5 voters, the 3 Koch Bros, Tommy and dcm since it got clobbered in every county in the State..downstate, upstate, city, suburbs, rural ALL

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

I'm vehemently against a constitutional convention, both on the local and federal level.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 08, 2017, 07:24:54 AM
I will officially remove you from the Gang of Five.

My bad

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 08, 2017, 08:16:12 AM
Did somebody have to petition to put the convention on the ballot or is it something that automatically comes up for vote periodically?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 08, 2017, 08:19:34 AM
Did somebody have to petition to put the convention on the ballot or is it something that automatically comes up for vote periodically?

It comes up for vote every 20 years, last time was 1997.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 08, 2017, 08:21:05 AM
I'm vehemently against a constitutional convention, both on the local and federal level.

I will be honest, this is shocking.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 08, 2017, 10:16:51 AM
The guy who wrote the Trans Bathroom Bill was just replaced by a trans woman. I probably enjoy this way too much.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 08, 2017, 11:07:49 AM
The guy who wrote the Trans Bathroom Bill was just replaced by a guy.

FYP
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 08, 2017, 12:32:53 PM
I will be honest, this is shocking.

I'm not.

Neither side wants it. Sure, your side might get the upper hand and get to do the majority of the rewriting, but it might not. What if your side comes up short?

For example, say I led a special interest that had enough money to directly influence the writing of a law in the constitution. Say I use that power to write a law that requires all single men to watch two gay lovers have rough sex for 40 minutes per week. Can you imagine Tommy having to live through that? He'd be the next domestic terrorist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 08, 2017, 12:45:42 PM
I'm not.

Neither side wants it. Sure, your side might get the upper hand and get to do the majority of the rewriting, but it might not. What if your side comes up short?

For example, say I led a special interest that had enough money to directly influence the writing of a law in the constitution. Say I use that power to write a law that requires all single men to watch two gay lovers have rough sex for 40 minutes per week. Can you imagine Tommy having to live through that? He'd be the next domestic terrorist.

He'd be OK with it as long as he was allowed to bring his laser pointer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 08, 2017, 01:04:50 PM
Hahaha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 08, 2017, 10:49:07 PM
The guy who wrote the Trans Bathroom Bill was just replaced by a trans woman. I probably enjoy this way too much.

https://twitter.com/krangtnelson/status/928335979596996608
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 09, 2017, 05:57:18 PM
Roy Moore, lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 09, 2017, 06:05:57 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171110/e2107d4e176f65d1daee36449fc13fc3.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 10, 2017, 07:03:03 AM
Technically not MORON

Joseph, according to the widely read book of fairy tales known as the bible had no sexual role in 14 year old mary's conception

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 10, 2017, 11:54:19 AM
What shocks me is the people who keep saying that "even if he did" what he's being accused of, as though it were possibly still not true despite thirty verified sources, they'd still vote for him rather than a Democrat.

The tribalism in this country has gone over the tipping point. The side of the aisle that traditionally stood upon its "moral high ground", now advocates for the free speech of Nazis, mass murdering psychopaths' right to guns, and pedophiles.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 10, 2017, 11:59:06 AM
What shocks me is the people who keep saying that "even if he did" what he's being accused of, as though it were possibly still not true despite thirty verified sources, they'd still vote for him rather than a Democrat.

The tribalism in this country has gone over the tipping point. The side of the aisle that traditionally stood upon its "moral high ground", now advocates for the free speech of Nazis, mass murdering psychopaths' right to guns, and pedophiles.
This is why I believe my policy of hating everyone is valid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 10, 2017, 12:01:43 PM
What shocks me is the people who keep saying that "even if he did" what he's being accused of, as though it were possibly still not true despite thirty verified sources, they'd still vote for him rather than a Democrat.

The tribalism in this country has gone over the tipping point. The side of the aisle that traditionally stood upon its "moral high ground", now advocates for the free speech of Nazis, mass murdering psychopaths' right to guns, and pedophiles.

Yeah, sure. It's just one side of the political aisle. The ones who immediately call those who don't agree with them racists also sit comfortably on their own fucked up "moral high ground".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 10, 2017, 12:31:37 PM
This is why I believe my policy of hating everyone is valid.

Misanthropy only works when practiced daily.

Yeah, sure. It's just one side of the political aisle. The ones who immediately call those who don't agree with them racists also sit comfortably on their own fucked up "moral high ground".

Tommy, I know what you're trying to say, but we're talking about different things. People who believe in white supremacy and wear swastika armbands are Nazis. That's not hyperbole.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 10, 2017, 01:12:36 PM
What shocks me is the people who keep saying that "even if he did" what he's being accused of, as though it were possibly still not true despite thirty verified sources, they'd still vote for him rather than a Democrat.

The tribalism in this country has gone over the tipping point. The side of the aisle that traditionally stood upon its "moral high ground", now advocates for the free speech of Nazis, mass murdering psychopaths' right to guns, and pedophiles.
Don't worry A.

dcm will be along shortly to explain that it was Hillary and Obama's fault, and tell us about uranium and brazile and her emails and that NO he didn't vote for Adolf Von Drumpf for POTUS in Nov

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 10, 2017, 01:30:05 PM
Misanthropy only works when practiced daily.

Tommy, I know what you're trying to say, but we're talking about different things. People who believe in white supremacy and wear swastika armbands are Nazis. That's not hyperbole.

How many of those do you think even exist? You probably can't fill up the Meadowlands if you threw in all the Nazi and White Supremacists in there. I'm sick of people like you acting like this country is all of a sudden Germany in 1932.

Laser-focusing on less than 0.01% of the population is lazy and distracts from being able to discuss real issues and how to solve them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 10, 2017, 01:42:29 PM
You probably can't fill up the Meadowlands if you threw in all the Nazi and White Supremacists in there.

Neither can the Jets or Giants.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 10, 2017, 01:44:31 PM
Neither can the Jets or Giants.

Hahaha touché.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 10, 2017, 09:31:27 PM
Who cares what a Nazi or white supremicist has to say? Let them say it, that's what this country was founded on. When they have to go under the radar and use other means to get their message across it's inherently more dangerous.

What we know can't hurt us as much as what we don't know.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 11, 2017, 09:22:59 AM
When they have to go under the radar and use other means to get their message across it's inherently more dangerous.

what
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 11, 2017, 10:45:14 AM
what

You know what I mean about hate speech and the violence it can cause.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 11, 2017, 07:06:19 PM
You know what I mean about hate speech and the violence it can cause.
Moreso when hate speech is given a platform it doesn't deserve. A bunch of chuds posting on Stormfront isn't as damaging as Richard Spencer speaking at a college.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 11, 2017, 09:03:45 PM
Moreso when hate speech is given a platform it doesn't deserve. A bunch of chuds posting on Stormfront isn't as damaging as Richard Spencer speaking at a college.

The problem is that the fringes on the left have been throwing around "Nazi" and "racist" around so much that they've given themselves what they think is some moral justification to start riots and to silence anyone[/] who they deem as such. The events at Berkeley this year is a good example of how this can get out of hand.

So if you're Richard Spencer, you see the violence when conservatives like Ben Shapiro and the outspoken ones like Milo and Coulter go to speak there and the violence it elicits, you see a great opportunity to try to get he same reaction to build your narrative and help recruitment. Those Antifa weirdos play right into their hands when they do that excrement, and simply ignoring them would be farrrrr better. What possible damage could Spencer do by speaking to 200 people on campus? Compare that with the entire country watching the news and seeing YouTube videos of the violence and allowing that scumbag a chance to be the victim.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 11, 2017, 09:44:58 PM
The problem is that the fringes on the left have been throwing around "Nazi" and "racist" around so much that they've given themselves what they think is some moral justification to start riots and to silence anyone[/] who they deem as such. The events at Berkeley this year is a good example of how this can get out of hand.

So if you're Richard Spencer, you see the violence when conservatives like Ben Shapiro and the outspoken ones like Milo and Coulter go to speak there and the violence it elicits, you see a great opportunity to try to get he same reaction to build your narrative and help recruitment. Those Antifa weirdos play right into their hands when they do that excrement, and simply ignoring them would be farrrrr better. What possible damage could Spencer do by speaking to 200 people on campus? Compare that with the entire country watching the news and seeing YouTube videos of the violence and allowing that scumbag a chance to be the victim.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171112/331824db2c36805f02ad5dc06f5fb55b.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 11, 2017, 09:48:52 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171112/331824db2c36805f02ad5dc06f5fb55b.jpg)

You used to be a rational guy. Dunno what happened. "Violent opposition". Please. Riots plain and simple. And let's not pretend that most of those rioters weren't white, so we're not talking 1991 Los Angeles here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 11, 2017, 10:03:55 PM
You used to be a rational guy. Dunno what happened. "Violent opposition". Please. Riots plain and simple. And let's not pretend that most of those rioters weren't white, so we're not talking 1991 Los Angeles here.

I don't know why anti-racists make you butthurt and defensive.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 11, 2017, 10:16:40 PM
I don't know why anti-racists make you butthurt and defensive.

They're not anti-racists. They're anarchists who will label anyone they don't agree with as racist and then instead of debating them they'll throw a fuckn tantrum in the name of anti-fascism. Look who they're protesting. The largest and most violent riots we've seen this year were against conservatives Milo and Ben Shapiro. Anyone who thinks either of those guys are racists are morons who have never read or listened to them. They just see a conservative and assume that they're racist because it fits their fucked up narrative. Don't you see how dangerous that is? Just calling someone racist is enough to get these morons riled up. Yeah they think they're protesting racism, but they have no clue what that word means, and instead are rioting against views they disagree with.

I honestly can't believe you don't see any of this. For some reason you've gone from looking at things logically to picking a side and making everything an "us" vs "them" issue. I feel like people have gone crazy the last couple of years.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 11, 2017, 10:35:01 PM
Sorry for not engaging in mental gymnastics to defend pieces of excrement. There are so many things I'd rather burn calories on than making sure Milo gets to talk.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 12, 2017, 04:59:56 AM
The Tommy dictionary


Against right wing Nazis and KKK bigots

"Antifa weirdos"

Right wing Nazi and KKK bigots like Spencer, Milo, Coulter, Miller, Gorka, Judge Roy and Trump

"Some very fine people"

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on November 12, 2017, 06:13:22 AM
They're not anti-racists. They're anarchists who will label anyone they don't agree with as racist and then instead of debating them they'll throw a fuckn tantrum in the name of anti-fascism. Look who they're protesting. The largest and most violent riots we've seen this year were against conservatives Milo and Ben Shapiro. Anyone who thinks either of those guys are racists are morons who have never read or listened to them. They just see a conservative and assume that they're racist because it fits their fucked up narrative. Don't you see how dangerous that is? Just calling someone racist is enough to get these morons riled up. Yeah they think they're protesting racism, but they have no clue what that word means, and instead are rioting against views they disagree with.

I honestly can't believe you don't see any of this. For some reason you've gone from looking at things logically to picking a side and making everything an "us" vs "them" issue. I feel like people have gone crazy the last couple of years.

Milo's whole existence is so you can just scream the other side is actually more intolerant than yours. If he wasn't a bright burning flamer you wouldn't know his name or care that some kids on a college campus thought he was an poopchute.

Ben Shapiro is that poopchute who got a great education and then used it to tell everyone how stupid getting an education is. Great guy.

You guys better come up with a better plan than "I know you are but what am I." It's good enough for 45% of the vote but I don't think it's going to work on that last 2-3% this time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 12, 2017, 10:54:59 AM
Milo's whole existence is so you can just scream the other side is actually more intolerant than yours. If he wasn't a bright burning flamer you wouldn't know his name or care that some kids on a college campus thought he was an poopchute.

Ben Shapiro is that poopchute who got a great education and then used it to tell everyone how stupid getting an education is. Great guy.

You guys better come up with a better plan than "I know you are but what am I." It's good enough for 45% of the vote but I don't think it's going to work on that last 2-3% this time.

There was a period from October 2016 to February 2017 where I actually respected Shapiro for being a principled conservative. But the facade fell when he whined about Hollywood giving awards to movies about gay blacks instead of veterans. Just another reactionary turd.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 13, 2017, 12:54:24 AM
They're not anti-racists. They're anarchists who will label anyone they don't agree with as racist and then instead of debating them they'll throw a fuckn tantrum in the name of anti-fascism. Look who they're protesting. The largest and most violent riots we've seen this year were against conservatives Milo and Ben Shapiro. Anyone who thinks either of those guys are racists are morons who have never read or listened to them. They just see a conservative and assume that they're racist because it fits their fucked up narrative. Don't you see how dangerous that is? Just calling someone racist is enough to get these morons riled up. Yeah they think they're protesting racism, but they have no clue what that word means, and instead are rioting against views they disagree with.

I honestly can't believe you don't see any of this. For some reason you've gone from looking at things logically to picking a side and making everything an "us" vs "them" issue. I feel like people have gone crazy the last couple of years.
Holy excrement dude.  You will never understand.

The inception excrement you pulled off in this post was epic though.

When the tea party was burning a hanging Obama in effigy, did you rise up and say they were out of line?  Were they just throwing a 'tantrum', or some other bullshit that you will come up with?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 13, 2017, 01:43:19 AM
Holy excrement dude.  You will never understand.

The inception excrement you pulled off in this post was epic though.

When the tea party was burning a hanging Obama in effigy, did you rise up and say they were out of line?  Were they just throwing a 'tantrum', or some other bullshit that you will come up with?

Dude, give me a break with that excrement. Protestors burned and hung effigies of Bush for 8 years before Obama, and they're doing it after Obama now with Trump. Who gives a excrement? It's not violence. Not even sure how you can compare that with burning down a bank and beating the excrement out of other people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 13, 2017, 05:37:54 AM
Dude, give me a break with that excrement. Protestors burned and hung effigies of Bush for 8 years before Obama, and they're doing it after Obama now with Trump. Who gives a excrement? It's not violence. Not even sure how you can compare that with burning down a bank and beating the excrement out of other people.
What about waving Nazi flags, chanting Kill the Jews and murdering an innocent woman by driving a car into the crowd.

Some "very fine Hitler fan people"

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 13, 2017, 05:41:11 AM
What about waving Nazi flags, chanting Kill the Jews and murdering an innocent woman by driving a car into the crowd.

Some "very fine Hitler fan people"

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

John Oliver had a great bit about "Whataboutism" on his show last night. Very timely considering both of your responses.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 13, 2017, 05:59:37 AM
http://www.newsweek.com/donna-brazile-book-seth-rich-dnc-murder-conspiracy-702838
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 13, 2017, 08:08:31 AM
John Oliver had a great bit about "Whataboutism" on his show last night. Very timely considering both of your responses.
Actual his discussion of what aboutism was about your disgusting GOP and their complicit labdogs of fake news, FoxNews

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 13, 2017, 08:10:18 AM
Actual his discussion of what aboutism was about your disgusting GOP and their complicit labdogs of fake news, FoxNews

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

And you're proving that you're just as transparent as Fox News and just as much of a lapdog but with a polar opposite viewpoint.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 13, 2017, 09:24:42 AM
And you're proving that you're just as transparent as Fox News and just as much of a lapdog but with a polar opposite viewpoint.
Final comment

Trump is a traitor and anyone who still thinks he isn't is a moron

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 13, 2017, 09:25:58 AM
Final comment

Fake news.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 13, 2017, 10:30:33 AM
And you're proving that you're just as transparent as Fox News and just as much of a lapdog but with a polar opposite viewpoint.
We are not talking about polar opposites.  Not wanting to kill blacks and jews seems like a pretty moderate stance to me.  But universal health care and everyone paying their part in taxes seems moderate to me too, so I could just be crazy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 13, 2017, 10:47:35 AM
We are not talking about polar opposites.  Not wanting to kill blacks and jews seems like a pretty moderate stance to me.  But universal health care and everyone paying their part in taxes seems moderate to me too, so I could just be crazy.

What are we even talking about? My post was about those idiot groups protesting in Berkeley to deny free speech to those they disagreed with and who they believed to be racists or nazis. I'd happily wave a flag of Stalin and march with those Antifa faggots if it's against the Nazis or white supremacists, but just because they were against obvious Nazis doesn't mean everything they do is righteous. You're allowed to criticize them AND hate nazis, but you're making it seem like being anti-Antifa is pro-nazi.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 13, 2017, 07:12:01 PM
And you're proving that you're just as transparent as Fox News and just as much of a lapdog but with a polar opposite viewpoint.

I'm glad we're holding Fox News and a random shitposter to the same standard.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 13, 2017, 07:44:12 PM
I'm glad we're holding Fox News and a random shitposter to the same standard.

Who do you think writes Fox News material and controls their format: their viewers. MSNBC doesn't push their collective agenda on the people. They didn't create the far left, it's the other way around. Fox News itself is the same in that their sole agenda is to pander to their viewer demographics and perpetuate their collective opinions. Republican shills and ultra conservatives.

The vast majority of the public don't watch that excrement and they sure as hell don't get their news from them. They have their own sources. Most are stuck speaking to people who share their views and read blogs/listen to podcasts that give them the same reaction: that they're right and the other side is wrong. They're part of a way of thinking, or a member of a team, and that team wants to discredit their rivals.

I ridicule the far left morons like Antifa and SJWs because I get enjoyment out of it just like you guys and those on the other side. Hearing opinions that fit yours entrenches those beliefs even more and further discourages you from engaging in dialogue with the other side since their beliefs are also being entrenched, which makes honest debate increasingly difficult.

The far left and far right are already hopeless, just as we've seen with the Berkeley protests, the SJWs in their incubated college campuses where their views are being reinforced on a daily basis. Far right whose views do the same by watching Fox News and telling them what to broadcast. It's the majority of us, the ones in the middle, who I'm  concerned about. Increasingly being pulled in either direction until we truly get to a point where we're so polarized that we stop talking. And we all know what comes next when that happens, history repeats itself and I fear that we're already in the middle of it and we don't realize it yet.

I'm not under the delusion that because I see what's going on that I'm immune to falling into this like so many others. I've seen it with you as you've noticeably have been pulled quite a bit to the left while always being in the middle, and some can say that I'm moving more into the right. Before we know it this thread will become a graveyard because debate will no longer be possible.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 13, 2017, 08:08:09 PM
So basically you've bundled together a bunch of things you don't like and decided they are the far left.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 13, 2017, 10:23:40 PM
So basically you've bundled together a bunch of things you don't like and decided they are the far left.

I'm not calling people who disagree with me far left, I'm calling those who rush to accuse anyone who disagree with them as a nazi as the Far Left. That's far worse than me accusing someone of being Far Left, but those morons marching definitely fit that label, so I don't know what the issue is. If you consider the Berkeley riots perfectly normal behavior by a group of people who simply disagree with conservatives, then you're so far removed from reality that it's pointless going any further than this with you.

It is what it is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 14, 2017, 05:39:05 AM
Tommy

The virtuous beacon of the moderate middle ground in American politics

Defending the "tenants" of democracy!

LOL

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 14, 2017, 09:28:26 AM
I'm not calling people who disagree with me far left, I'm calling those who rush to accuse anyone who disagree with them as a nazi as the Far Left. That's far worse than me accusing someone of being Far Left, but those morons marching definitely fit that label, so I don't know what the issue is. If you consider the Berkeley riots perfectly normal behavior by a group of people who simply disagree with conservatives, then you're so far removed from reality that it's pointless going any further than this with you.

It is what it is.
The problem Tommy is that there is no polar opposite to the far right.  There just isn't.  Being an idiot and calling someone a nazi because you disagree with them is not the same as actually being a freaking nazi or white supremacist.  That's where your argument falls flat.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 14, 2017, 11:22:33 AM
I think Tommy's right, at least about the country migrating into polar opposite directions. True discourse is becoming increasingly rare. Both sides are an echo chamber, and neither wants to listen to the other anymore. The middle ground is quickly disappearing.

That said, I can't see any reasonable defense for the "alt right." And no, I won't entertain their "right" to "free speech." All rights have a limit, and hate speech goes beyond the first amendment's.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 14, 2017, 01:07:29 PM
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/13/opinion/juanita-broaddrick-bill-clinton.html

Guess we’re done pretending this never happened cuz 2017
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 14, 2017, 01:25:34 PM
Of the remaining unaccused ex-presidents, who is most likely to have grazed a little side boob back in the eighties?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 14, 2017, 01:30:36 PM
https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/13/opinion/juanita-broaddrick-bill-clinton.html

Guess we’re done pretending this never happened cuz 2017
When did right wing hack Michelle Malkin get married to right wing hack Jonah Goldberg?

Seriously Bill Clinton finished his successful Presidency 17 years ago. Since then we have had a sex scandal free 8 years with Bush and 8 more with Obama.

Now with the King of Sleeze in the WH sex scandals are dropping out of the sky daily. Sad that the Whataboutism right wingers have to go dredging all the way back to the last century to try and deflect from the ethical problems the Orange dildo, O'Reilly, Ailes, Moore and the rest of the GOP cockroaches have caused our nation recently


Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 14, 2017, 01:33:47 PM
When did right wing hack Michelle Malkin get married to right wing hack Jonah Goldberg?

Seriously Bill Clinton finished his successful Presidency 17 years ago. Since then we have had a sex scandal free 8 years with Bush and 8 more with Obama.

Now with the King of Sleeze in the WH sex scandals are dropping out of the sky daily. Sad that the Whataboutism right wingers have to go dredging all the way back to the last century to try and deflect from the ethical problems the Orange dildo, O'Reilly, Ailes, Moore and the rest of the GOP cockroaches have caused our nation recently


Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



Right, Trump made all of those people in Hollywood rape women and kids 25+ years ago. Got it.

The point is these claims of rape and sexual abuse have largely been ignored or swept under the rug as long as I can remember. How are they less valid than the accusations currently flooding out of Hollywood?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 14, 2017, 01:47:10 PM
Wait. I thought this thread was about US politics.  I think there's another one about Hollywood groping where you can discuss Hollywood groping

Meanwhile the only relevant US Politics groping topic now is Judge Roy Cosby and the 14, 16 and two or three other teenagers and you What Abouted up Juanita Broderick to desperately defend his acts.

Was she 14 by the way?  Doesn't look like it in that article



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 14, 2017, 01:49:46 PM
Wait. I thought this thread was about US politics.  I think there's another one about Hollywood groping where you can discuss Hollywood groping

Meanwhile the only relevant US Politics groping topic now is Judge Roy Cosby and the 14, 16 and two or three other teenagers and you What Abouted up Juanita Broderick to desperately defend his acts.

Was she 14 by the way?  Doesn't look like it in that article



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



You tell that poopchute, SFD, show him who is boss.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 14, 2017, 02:11:36 PM
Wait. I thought this thread was about US politics.  I think there's another one about Hollywood groping where you can discuss Hollywood groping

Meanwhile the only relevant US Politics groping topic now is Judge Roy Cosby and the 14, 16 and two or three other teenagers and you What Abouted up Juanita Broderick to desperately defend his acts.

Was she 14 by the way?  Doesn't look like it in that article



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



I’m not defending anyone. I didn’t write the NYT article either. Put these posts in whatever rape thread you want. If you don’t think Bill Clinton should face consequence just like everyone else who committed sexual assault I don’t know what to tell you.

With that last comment it sounds like you’re insinuating rape is ok as long as the female is of age.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 14, 2017, 02:13:48 PM
You tell that poopchute, SFD, show him who is boss.

You calling other people assholes, that’s cute
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 14, 2017, 02:13:57 PM
You tell that poopchute, SFD, show him who is boss.
I appreciate your usual attempt to stir it up and add nothing

However I think, unlike you, that SFD is a fine poster and I respect his views. Also, unlike you, he is straight

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 14, 2017, 02:36:25 PM
You calling other people assholes, that’s cute

Shut up poopchute.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 14, 2017, 02:39:33 PM
I appreciate your usual attempt to stir it up and add nothing

However I think, unlike you, that SFD is a fine poster and I respect his views. Also, unlike you, he is straight

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk



Ok Aaron Jush, you go right to your honorable discourse. You have been more pleasant lately, did you find a good LPN to clean your depends? I bet you were a curmudgeon because those dirty adult diapers of yours really chafe you. All that itching and irritation from the smeared feces probably makes you angry. So with that enjoy your pureed peas and carrots and I hope the LPN doesn't stick it in too far tonight.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 14, 2017, 02:52:44 PM
I'm going to agree with SFD on this one. Anyone who assaults another person is responsible for their actions and should face the consequences. Just because he was a popular and charismatic President doesn't excuse him.

That said, the current POTUS should also be facing charges. He literally filmed video evidence of admissions of guilt.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 14, 2017, 03:31:06 PM
Ok Aaron Jush, you go right to your honorable discourse. You have been more pleasant lately, did you find a good LPN to clean your depends? I bet you were a curmudgeon because those dirty adult diapers of yours really chafe you. All that itching and irritation from the smeared feces probably makes you angry. So with that enjoy your pureed peas and carrots and I hope the LPN doesn't stick it in too far tonight.
Sorry

Not working


Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 14, 2017, 04:07:54 PM
You calling other people assholes, that’s cute
I appreciate your usual attempt to stir it up and add nothing

However I think, unlike you, that SFD is a fine poster and I respect his views. Also, unlike you, he is straight

Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk


Shut up poopchute.

Are you guys gonna have a 3 way?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on November 14, 2017, 05:56:13 PM
Meanwhile back at Politics

1. Reports of multiple sex harassments in Congress. Slimy Lyin Ryan calling for mandatory training

2. Mitch the Turtle floating the idea of Beauregard the Keebler elf as a write in candidate for his old seat vs Judge Cosby and Doug Jones



Sent from my LG-H830 using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 14, 2017, 09:41:13 PM
1. Reports of multiple sex harassments in Congress. Slimy Lyin Ryan calling for mandatory training

https://youtu.be/OQnNH7I07RY
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 14, 2017, 11:38:02 PM
I'm going to agree with SFD on this one. Anyone who assaults another person is responsible for their actions and should face the consequences. Just because he was a popular and charismatic President doesn't excuse him.

That said, the current POTUS should also be facing charges. He literally filmed video evidence of admissions of guilt.

That video alone should have disqualified him from the election but hey why would it when he was running against the single worst candidate ever.

The 2nd worst candidate ever, won. Anyway, to your point there has to be a victim that comes forward and not a single woman has yet.

This past election with those 2 candidates has set back this country immeasurably.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on November 15, 2017, 08:00:29 AM
That video alone should have disqualified him from the election but hey why would it when he was running against the single worst candidate ever.

The 2nd worst candidate ever, won. Anyway, to your point there has to be a victim that comes forward and not a single woman has yet.

This past election with those 2 candidates has set back this country immeasurably.

It's mind blowing that we somehow devolved into a guaranteed disaster with our 2 Presidential candidates. We can't get 2 people who aren't scum through and through?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 15, 2017, 08:13:03 AM
We can't get 2 people who aren't scum through and through?

Been saying this my whole life
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 15, 2017, 08:16:29 AM
It's mind blowing that we somehow devolved into a guaranteed disaster with our 2 Presidential candidates. We can't get 2 people who aren't scum through and through?

I don't think it's possible to be a successful candidate anymore and not be sleazy and/or sketchy.  If you are a good and honest person, the election system will reject you like Puck trying to hit on a girl that's anything above a 2 or 3.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 15, 2017, 11:37:18 AM
I don't think it's possible to be a successful candidate anymore and not be sleazy and/or sketchy.  If you are a good and honest person, the election system will reject you like Puck trying to hit on a girl that's anything above a 2 or 3.

I've been saying for ages that it takes a complete narcissist to run for office in any capacity. It takes the very most narcissistic of all to run for President.

It's not a question of whether a politician is sketchy. It's not a question of whether a politician is influenced by special interests. It's not a question of skeletons in their closet. The only question is "how much"?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 16, 2017, 09:45:34 AM
http://www.kabc.com/2017/11/16/leeann-tweeden-on-senator-al-franken/


Down Goes Franken!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 16, 2017, 09:49:43 AM
http://www.kabc.com/2017/11/16/leeann-tweeden-on-senator-al-franken/


Down Goes Franken!


It's already established that it's OK for men in politics to behave that way. You voted for it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 16, 2017, 09:54:08 AM
It's already established that it's OK for men in politics to behave that way. You voted for it.

Um, no.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 16, 2017, 10:08:41 AM
Again, I'm with SFD on this one. No, it's not okay. Franken is a pig, and should be punished.

But again, so should the freaking President of the United States.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 16, 2017, 10:16:04 AM
http://www.kabc.com/2017/11/16/leeann-tweeden-on-senator-al-franken/


Down Goes Franken!


Just saw it, posted in the gropin thread.  Changed the title to make it easier to organize the fondling.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 16, 2017, 11:37:37 AM
That video alone should have disqualified him from the election but hey why would it when he was running against the single worst candidate ever.

The 2nd worst candidate ever, won. Anyway, to your point there has to be a victim that comes forward and not a single woman has yet.

This past election with those 2 candidates has set back this country immeasurably.
It's mind blowing that we somehow devolved into a guaranteed disaster with our 2 Presidential candidates. We can't get 2 people who aren't scum through and through?
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/08/01/us/elections/nine-percent-of-america-selected-trump-and-clinton.html

Our voting system sucks.

It's kinda funny (and depressing) how the DNC tightly controlled its primary to result in the outcome they wanted and the RNC had a free for all shitshow primary and both of them yielded garbage most people didn't want.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 16, 2017, 01:33:29 PM
Senator Al Franken:

Quote
The first thing I want to do is apologize: to Leeann, to everyone else who was part of that tour, to everyone who has worked for me, to everyone I represent, and to everyone who counts on me to be an ally and supporter and champion of women. There's more I want to say, but the first and most important thing—and if it's the only thing you care to hear, that's fine—is: I'm sorry.

I respect women. I don't respect men who don't. And the fact that my own actions have given people a good reason to doubt that makes me feel ashamed.

But I want to say something else, too. Over the last few months, all of us—including and especially men who respect women—have been forced to take a good, hard look at our own actions and think (perhaps, shamefully, for the first time) about how those actions have affected women.

For instance, that picture. I don't know what was in my head when I took that picture, and it doesn't matter. There's no excuse. I look at it now and I feel disgusted with myself. It isn't funny. It's completely inappropriate. It's obvious how Leeann would feel violated by that picture. And, what's more, I can see how millions of other women would feel violated by it—women who have had similar experiences in their own lives, women who fear having those experiences, women who look up to me, women who have counted on me.
Coming from the world of comedy, I've told and written a lot of jokes that I once thought were funny but later came to realize were just plain offensive. But the intentions behind my actions aren't the point at all. It's the impact these jokes had on others that matters. And I'm sorry it's taken me so long to come to terms with that.

While I don't remember the rehearsal for the skit as Leeann does, I understand why we need to listen to and believe women’s experiences.

I am asking that an ethics investigation be undertaken, and I will gladly cooperate.

And the truth is, what people think of me in light of this is far less important than what people think of women who continue to come forward to tell their stories. They deserve to be heard, and believed. And they deserve to know that I am their ally and supporter. I have let them down and am committed to making it up to them.

It obviously doesn't excuse anything that he has done, but as apologies go it's up there with CK's.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 16, 2017, 01:39:04 PM
I don't want to give anyone second chances at this point, but that is a pretty good apology.

The one big negative I'll point out is that there's an "I'm sorry I got caught" element to it. It's not like he came forward and said "I once inappropriately treated Leanne like a piece of meat and I'm sorry." He apologized after she finally came forward to tell her story.

But I do think it's good that he flat out said he has no excuses. Because he's right. There are no excuses.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 17, 2017, 11:12:57 AM
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/360874-navy-acknowledges-pilot-drew-male-genitalia-in-the-sky
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on November 17, 2017, 12:02:59 PM
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/360874-navy-acknowledges-pilot-drew-male-genitalia-in-the-sky

Can't impeach Trump now. We can drop the the M and jus AGA now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 18, 2017, 01:03:45 PM
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/lawmaker-wes-goodman-anti-lgbt-resigns-sex-man-office-caught-ohio-republican-christian-family-values-a8060631.html

Quote
An Ohio lawmaker who routinely touted his Christian faith and anti-LGBT views has resigned after being caught having sex with a man in his office.

Wes Goodman, who is the Republican state legislator for Ohio, is married to a woman who is assistant director of an annual anti-abortion rally known as March for Life.

The right-wing legislator, who pushed “family values”, was reportedly witnessed having sex with a man inside his office who was not employed by the legislator.


LOL.

He should be commended. What better way to prevent abortion than to shoot for the dirt star?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on November 18, 2017, 03:30:47 PM
Literally every dude who is super against anything LGBT just wants it in his butt and feels bad about it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 18, 2017, 09:18:49 PM
Hahahahahahahahahahahahahah I can't stop laughing.

I can picture him at a voters rally....." The gays are bad and won't go to heaven, faggots are disgusting creatures that make me sick........ Hey you, you the guy in front there, can I suck your rooster, if not I have a can of lube or you can suck mine."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 18, 2017, 10:23:36 PM
I love the fact that I finish an amazing apology from Franken only to get a bunch of funbags and derriere in my face.  Thank you live.me lol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 18, 2017, 10:28:01 PM
I love the fact that I finish an amazing apology from Franken only to get a bunch of funbags and derriere in my face.  Thank you live.me lol.
Huh?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 19, 2017, 07:58:03 AM
Breed tub
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 20, 2017, 01:11:50 AM
Huh?
The ads.  Might just be a tapatalk thing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 20, 2017, 09:03:06 AM
The ads.  Might just be a tapatalk thing.

Huh?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 20, 2017, 09:41:44 AM
The ads.  Might just be a tapatalk thing.
I can yes. I'd? American eleventeen will been sand.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 21, 2017, 08:30:42 AM
I can yes. I'd? American eleventeen will been sand.

(https://scontent.fybz2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/23736240_10154946629861231_148811550852596192_o.jpg?oh=59f93ab786e99617007647e29fe08c91&oe=5A9ED1C7)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 21, 2017, 08:35:25 AM
(https://scontent.fybz2-1.fna.fbcdn.net/v/t31.0-8/23736240_10154946629861231_148811550852596192_o.jpg?oh=59f93ab786e99617007647e29fe08c91&oe=5A9ED1C7)

Should be Klecko for accuracy. I remember hearing that speech live and being like “holy excrement this guy is as drunk as I am! Wait, no he’s actually drunker and possibility on some pills as well.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 21, 2017, 01:51:04 PM
LOL.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/11/21/net-neutrality-rules-face-demise-fcc-vote-coming-next-month/880061001/

You just keep on making America great again, one Verizon at a time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 21, 2017, 03:10:42 PM
LOL.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/tech/news/2017/11/21/net-neutrality-rules-face-demise-fcc-vote-coming-next-month/880061001/

You just keep on making America great again, one Verizon at a time.

Ajit Pai is a queynte. I hate that dude almost as much as the President.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on November 21, 2017, 07:19:57 PM
The only way it's gonna make enough people mad is if they start trying to make people pay extra for Netflix and online games.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 21, 2017, 08:03:29 PM
I'll never understand the amount of sheer dumbfuckery it takes for a regular Joe to be against net neutrality. It should be overwhelmingly obvious where your interests lie as a consumer but apparently all it takes is some snake saying "net neutrality is Obamacare for the internet" for these retards to fall in line.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on November 21, 2017, 08:28:41 PM
I hope my new internet bundle comes with jetoffensive but if it's between that and my scheisse porn sites then I must bid you fine gents adieu. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 21, 2017, 09:27:35 PM
I'll never understand the amount of sheer dumbfuckery it takes for a regular Joe to be against net neutrality. It should be overwhelmingly obvious where your interests lie as a consumer but apparently all it takes is some snake saying "net neutrality is Obamacare for the internet" for these retards to fall in line.

There are apparently a significant number of people who currently consider "not a Democrat" to be more important than "probably a pedophile", so it's no surprise that something like net neutrality is an easy partisan decision for them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ukilledkenny on November 22, 2017, 07:01:12 AM
I'll never understand the amount of sheer dumbfuckery it takes for a regular Joe to be against net neutrality. It should be overwhelmingly obvious where your interests lie as a consumer but apparently all it takes is some snake saying "net neutrality is Obamacare for the internet" for these retards to fall in line.

The same reason when they are talking about guns the government should leave people alone but then are 100% enthusiastically against legal pot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 22, 2017, 07:07:09 AM
But it should very obviously not be a partisan issue... I can rationalize why someone would vote for Trump, but not why someone who's at least modestly educated could be against NN.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 22, 2017, 07:33:48 AM
I'm sure the majority of people don't know or care to know what net neutrality even is.  The rest of the people think getting rid of it is a bad idea or are directly related to the decision making process (lobbyists, lawmakers).

Just to be the devil's advocate, could there be any positives that come from getting rid of it?  Obviously there would be plenty of negatives but ignore those for a minute.  Admittedly I'm no expert on the topic, but could it spur along faster developments in technology/infrastructure?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 22, 2017, 07:42:55 AM
But it should very obviously not be a partisan issue... I can rationalize why someone would vote for Trump, but not why someone who's at least modestly educated could be against NN.

Who exactly is for net nuetrality besides these giant corporations and politicians that will profit from it?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 22, 2017, 07:44:49 AM
I found this on a brief google search where Pai explains his side of the decision.  BTW he looks like Bababooey.

http://reason.com/blog/2017/11/21/ajit-pai-net-neutrality-podcast
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on November 22, 2017, 08:04:42 AM
I am so sick of this need for the current administration to repeal every single Obama initiative. I am sorry but a few of the things he has done were good for people, like NN. I couldn't stand the last 3-4 Presidents but let me say this, they're Abe Lincoln compared to the total failure this administration has turned out to be. They have literally done nothing this year but screw with people and make this Country and World a worse place to live.

I seriously hope they all die. Also, anyone that thinks Trump is even halfway competent is an abject moron and nobody I want to share air with.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 22, 2017, 08:18:30 AM
I am so sick of this need for the current administration to repeal every single Obama initiative. I am sorry but a few of the things he has done were good for people, like NN. I couldn't stand the last 3-4 Presidents but let me say this, they're Abe Lincoln compared to the total failure this administration has turned out to be. They have literally done nothing this year but screw with people and make this Country and World a worst place to live.

I seriously hope they all die. Also, anyone that thinks Trump is even halfway competent is an abject moron and nobody I want to share air with.

Trump Rulez, MAGA, yeah but how’s the the market doing, etc.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 22, 2017, 08:28:02 AM
Trump Rulez, MAGA, yeah but how’s the the market doing, etc.

Puck is just a poor man's white Don King without the hair.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 22, 2017, 08:35:30 AM
I did see one interesting, if slightly scary, suggestion as to why the NN repeal might turn out to be OK in the end, which is that while it's purely legislation it remains open to repeal and challenge at any time depending on who in the administration is being paid what by Verizon, whereas if this goes through concept of access to equal speeds could be challenged in the Supreme Court and if (big if) SCOTUS agrees that NN is right, it will become a Constitutional right that takes it permanently off the table for legislators.

I'm not a lawyer so I don't know how accurate that is, and even if it's right the fear would be that a loss at SCOTUS would have the opposite effect.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 22, 2017, 09:49:25 AM
Who exactly is for net nuetrality besides these giant corporations and politicians that will profit from it?
Do you mean against?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 22, 2017, 10:04:47 AM
I'm sure the majority of people don't know or care to know what net neutrality even is.  The rest of the people think getting rid of it is a bad idea or are directly related to the decision making process (lobbyists, lawmakers).

Just to be the devil's advocate, could there be any positives that come from getting rid of it?  Obviously there would be plenty of negatives but ignore those for a minute.  Admittedly I'm no expert on the topic, but could it spur along faster developments in technology/infrastructure?

Why would it?

The reason that the Verizons, AT&Ts, and Comcasts want to put an end to Net Neutrality is because they don't want to be "dumb pipes", meaning, they just deliver other organizations' content. They want to serve their own. Over their own pipes.

When you're trying to watch Stranger Things, or Game of Thrones, and Verizon is your provider, do you think they're going to allow that traffic to move as fast as a "Redbox Reborn" service?

Verizon wireless has been throttling data speeds--especially for users on Netflix and YouTube--on their unlimited plans ever since Pai announced he would be overturning NN if he was approved for the position. They didn't even wait for the law to change--or even for him to get through confirmation.

Who exactly is for net nuetrality besides these giant corporations and politicians that will profit from it?

I assume you meant "against" and I haven't seen anyone outside of the corporations and this administration say they're against it.

Ajit Pai is a freaking queynte, with the most punchable face this side of Ted Cruz.

I did see one interesting, if slightly scary, suggestion as to why the NN repeal might turn out to be OK in the end, which is that while it's purely legislation it remains open to repeal and challenge at any time depending on who in the administration is being paid what by Verizon, whereas if this goes through concept of access to equal speeds could be challenged in the Supreme Court and if (big if) SCOTUS agrees that NN is right, it will become a Constitutional right that takes it permanently off the table for legislators.

I'm not a lawyer so I don't know how accurate that is, and even if it's right the fear would be that a loss at SCOTUS would have the opposite effect.

If the SC were to vote on it, yeah, their ruling would stand fairly permanently. But that's a whole different problem. What if does go to the Supreme Court? It would first have to meander through the lower courts. By the time it got there, Trump may have replaced another justice and tipped the balance.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 22, 2017, 10:55:27 AM
Do you mean against?

Yes. I edited that post twice
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 22, 2017, 04:21:53 PM
Taking a brief break from net neutrality talk to point out Iowa Rep Steve King is retweeting white supremacists.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171122/3d42ad31c7ac495747d89b5070d742aa.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 23, 2017, 12:43:43 PM
Keep voting Republicans into office if you just can't get enough of that feeling of having someone pee down your back and tell you that it's raining.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/29/15100620/congress-fcc-isp-web-browsing-privacy-fire-sale
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Tommy on November 23, 2017, 01:04:31 PM
For the life of me I can't figure out why anyone would be against net neutrality . What's the Fuckn rationale?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 23, 2017, 01:07:40 PM
For the life of me I can't figure out why anyone would be against net neutrality . What's the Fuckn rationale?

You have a Republican controlled government that is in the pocket of big corporate lobbies. There doesn't need to be a rationale; big money put them there and it's time to pay the piper.

The people who control the national dialog are the people who stand to benefit. You just go along and vote like Rupert tells you to like a good little drone.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 23, 2017, 02:07:30 PM
Freedom! Liberty! Small government! Except when Verizon's paying, obviously.

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-rosenworcel-fcc-net-neutrality-repeal-20171122-story.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 23, 2017, 03:53:14 PM
Keep voting Republicans into office if you just can't get enough of that feeling of having someone pee down your back and tell you that it's raining.

https://www.theverge.com/2017/3/29/15100620/congress-fcc-isp-web-browsing-privacy-fire-sale

Name one person here in a red state.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 23, 2017, 04:42:41 PM
Name one person here in a red state.

It wasn't actually aimed at anyone specifically on here, although people who vote Republican despite their vote "not mattering" are every bit as culpable for the decisions made by the government they voted for as those in blue states.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 24, 2017, 01:31:33 PM
It wasn't actually aimed at anyone specifically on here, although people who vote Republican despite their vote "not mattering" are every bit as culpable for the decisions made by the government they voted for as those in blue states.
I honestly don't think any self proclaimed republican on this board identifies with the party as it is now.

Their goals are so obviously self serving and evil.  How could they align with this?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 24, 2017, 09:42:46 PM
I honestly don't think any self proclaimed republican on this board identifies with the party as it is now.

Their goals are so obviously self serving and evil.  How could they align with this?

"I want to pay less in taxes and the other stuff just isn't important to me."

I can respect, on some level, an admission of the above. I can't respect the mental gymnastics required to defend the bullshit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 24, 2017, 09:55:20 PM
It wasn't actually aimed at anyone specifically on here, although people who vote Republican despite their vote "not mattering" are every bit as culpable for the decisions made by the government they voted for as those in blue states.

This is why I couldn't vote for Clinton, and obviously my vote wouldn't make a difference in NY but I'd still be cosigning her administration and its actions if i had. If I lived in a swing state I'd likely have voted for her out of pure self-interest, as the POTUS has more of an effect on my life than any of you, but I wouldn't be bending over backwards to defend why we're invading Iran or whatever shenanigans we'd be up to under her.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on November 24, 2017, 11:04:06 PM
This is why I couldn't vote for Clinton, and obviously my vote wouldn't make a difference in NY but I'd still be cosigning her administration and its actions if i had. If I lived in a swing state I'd likely have voted for her out of pure self-interest, as the POTUS has more of an effect on my life than any of you, but I wouldn't be bending over backwards to defend why we're invading Iran or whatever shenanigans we'd be up to under her.
I wouldn't have expected campaign finance reform, but invading Iran is a stretch.

She would have been handcuffed by a republican congress, so she wouldn't have been able to do much, but she wouldn't be rolling all the good things Obama did.

On the bright side, her losing created the tipping point we see now.  2018 and 2020 are going to be bloodbaths for republicans,
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 26, 2017, 08:22:41 AM
http://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a12775932/sackler-family-oxycontin/

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/ex-dea-agent-opioid-crisis-fueled-by-drug-industry-and-congress/

Must-reads if you want to know more about the opioid epidemic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 26, 2017, 09:06:49 AM
The Atlantic shits on the New York Times for their Nazi next door article.

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2017/11/a-nazi-cooks-pasta/546737/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 27, 2017, 02:26:31 PM
I found some amazing wordplay worthy of sg3 but I'm not gonna post it until I know he's alive and well.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 03, 2017, 09:46:13 PM
I found some amazing wordplay worthy of sg3 but I'm not gonna post it until I know he's alive and well.

Since sg3 is back

"Republican tax reform? More like tax DEFORM."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 03, 2017, 09:46:44 PM
"The Tax Policy Center estimated that about 80 percent of the benefit of the tax plan will go to the top 1 percent, who will enjoy the following elements of the tax cut:

A full $1.5 trillion alone is going to slash the corporate tax rate. CEOs have said repeatedly they plan to pocket that money rather than invest it or give workers higher wages.

The alternative minimum tax, paid almost exclusively by the rich, is also eliminated. That’s a $700 billion giveaway.

Another $150 billion goes to repealing the estate tax, which currently exempts the first $11 million of the deceased’s estate, so nobody even remotely middle class pays it. The repeal benefits so few people you can practically list them out.

More than $200 billion in cuts goes to a provision that allows a greater deduction for dividends on foreign earnings. That’s not for you.

Roughly $600 billion goes to reducing taxes on “pass-throughs” and other businesses not set up as corporations, which law firms, lobby shops, and doctors’ offices often benefit from. Poor and middle-class people do not tend to set themselves up as pass-throughs.

Under current law, many tax credits phase out at low-income thresholds. The GOP plan changes that by raising the threshold so richer people can also claim the credit. That provision alone is, by definition, a $200 billion tax cut for the wealthy.

Individual and family tax rates are cut by about $1 trillion, and some regular people will indeed see some of that money as a tax cut — but not much. As the New York Times noted, by 2027, people making between $40,000 and $50,000 would see a combined increase of $5.3 billion in taxes. Where would that money go? Folks earning more than $1 million would see their taxes collectively cut by $5.8 billion a year.

The list above brings the total well close to $5 trillion in tax cuts almost exclusively for the wealthy. The last major element of the bill, the doubling of the standard deduction, would benefit a broader range of people, but it comes at the expense of states, cities, and towns."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 03, 2017, 11:47:09 PM
Yeah but you see, it's all about the American Dream. Because next year I'll be one of them. So I'm going to vote for it now so I get to enjoy it then.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 04, 2017, 05:57:25 AM
Yeah but you see, it's all about the American Dream. Because next year I'll be one of them. So I'm going to vote for it now so I get to enjoy it then.
You're moving here?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 04, 2017, 06:11:01 AM
I agree that this tax cut is really more beneficial to the wealthy than its made out to be. I don't think anyone should be pretending this is helpful to the poor.  The narrative is that it helps the working middle class taxpayers.  I think the term "middle class" has been stretched to include people that are wealthy.

I don't know if this law will still be around as it currently is in 2027.  I'm sure parties will have flipped power at least once so who knows what this thing will look like then.  Even if by some miracle the GOP retains power, they will probably modify it somehow before then.

The important factors are, as Badger mentioned, do the businesses and wealthy people that do benefit from this sit on the money or do something with it. How far down the road do you consider money to be reinvested in the economy? Barring them putting the money under the mattress, what will the wealthy do with it that won't ultimately end up helping someone somewhere?

The GOP says the economy will grow enough to offset this deficit. I think it will grow to offset some, but not all.  Republican leaning economists say the US can return to 3-4% GDP again. Democratic economists say its virtually impossible to do any better than 2% with the way things are these days. Who knows.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 04, 2017, 07:26:51 AM


Republican leaning economists say the US can return to 3-4% GDP again. Democratic economists say its virtually impossible to do any better than 2% with the way things are these days. Who knows.

Relevant

https://theintercept.com/2017/12/01/gops-list-of-economists-backing-tax-cut-includes-ghosts-office-assistants-ex-felons-and-a-sprinkling-of-real-economists/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 04, 2017, 07:31:48 AM
The important factors are, as Badger mentioned, do the businesses and wealthy people that do benefit from this sit on the money or do something with it. How far down the road do you consider money to be reinvested in the economy? Barring them putting the money under the mattress, what will the wealthy do with it that won't ultimately end up helping someone somewhere?

Corporate profits are at record levels and have been for a few years. If they want to reinvest and grow there's nothing stopping them doing that already.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 04, 2017, 09:35:54 AM
Corporate profits are at record levels and have been for a few years. If they want to reinvest and grow there's nothing stopping them doing that already.
This.  And also, as per the usual, the money will be stashed in offshore accounts.

Also, if they think the money is going trickle down anyway (it will not), then why not just cut out the middle man?  The answer to that is clear (see above).

As wages and job growth stay stagnant, while the price of everything goes up, the vast majority of the population's buying power goes down.  Less buying leads to less corporate profits, job loss, lower wages, and fewer benefits.  This will lead to the next recession.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on December 04, 2017, 10:14:37 AM
The tax bill is a wonderful Christmas gift to the rich. It's also opposed by something like 80% of the American public. They don't give a excrement. Gerrymandering, coupled with "No libtards are gonna take muh guns, let baby murderers thrive, or tax me without rep-zentation" is going to keep them in power to keep feeding their billionaire buddies lining their pockets.

It's being reported that literally thousands of DC lobbyists worked on this tax bill. Anyone recall voting for a lobbyist to represent you in Congress?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 04, 2017, 11:35:19 AM
Corporate profits are at record levels and have been for a few years. If they want to reinvest and grow there's nothing stopping them doing that already.
Well, the promise of a tax cut and immediate write-offs for purchases will surely make them sit on the sidelines until it happens.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 05, 2017, 12:59:15 AM
Well, the promise of a tax cut and immediate write-offs for purchases will surely make them sit on the sidelines until it happens.

They had no reason to expect a cut until last November.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 05, 2017, 08:12:12 AM
They had no reason to expect a cut until last November.

That's the time period I'm talking about. Before that, I'm sure they were doing whatever benefits their bottom line the best.  According to these conservative analysts, the goal of the reform is to entice businesses to spend money by taxing them less (so they keep more $- not necessarily a huge issue overall prior to this as JE said)and allow immediate expensing to encourage businesses to buy the equipment/whatever they need now.  There's also the lowered tax on repatriating money, which is again more money for businesses- opinions differ on whether that will ultimately help or not.

The real question is not whether this will bring money back into the country and back to businesses, it's whether doing that will ultimately help increase paychecks and good jobs for people in the US.  We'll see I guess.  I'm not enough of an economist to know.  I don't think the personal tax reform does a lot to help most people, but it isn't final, so we'll see.



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 05, 2017, 03:31:34 PM
It won't change anything.  It's all smoke and mirrors.

There is still zero incentive to repatriate money, raise wages, or create more jobs domestically.

I like your luke warm optimism, but you will ultimately be disappointed.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 07, 2017, 03:36:53 PM
https://www.theroot.com/a-racist-flyer-might-cost-doug-jones-the-election-becau-1821065764
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 08, 2017, 10:32:42 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2017/dec/08/kim-davis-david-ermold-us-kentucky-town-clerk-same-sex-marriage-election?CMP=fb_gu
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 09, 2017, 01:18:47 PM
Can we make a deal to at least caption links?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 09, 2017, 03:40:10 PM
Can we make a deal to at least caption links?

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 09, 2017, 04:17:20 PM
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/No
Lol

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on December 09, 2017, 11:34:13 PM
https://www.theroot.com/a-racist-flyer-might-cost-doug-jones-the-election-becau-1821065764

Ugh, freak the DNC for being utter trash. And freak Alabama for being the worst freaking state in this country.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 10, 2017, 02:07:19 AM
I still can't help but LMAO that people will knowingly vote for a pedophile.

Give Harvey Weinstein a gun and a bible and he might be a Senator from Alabama. Actually scratch that he couldn't, he's Jewish.

Not to cast dispersion on anyone but that state is a blight on this country's poopchute. A bunch of backwards derriere fucktards. I hate people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on December 10, 2017, 02:53:13 AM
Ugh, freak the DNC for being utter trash. And freak Alabama for being the worst freaking state in this country.
If that swings votes to pedophile Judge Bull Conner and the party of son of KKK member Rump, then Alybamy should officially be nicknamed "The MORON State"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 11, 2017, 08:14:34 PM
Alabama social election is tomorrow.

They interviewed some Moore supporter outside a rally or something and she said "They're making up these lies because they're scared of him coming to Washington to drain the swamp." and I'm just dumbfounded at how strong the freaking delusion is. And this wasn't some creature who crawled out of a trailer park, it was a woman who looked reasonably put together, probably has a decent career and owns a house. Wtf.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 11, 2017, 08:46:09 PM
I can't imagine Moore wins. I think. How would you like to be the other guy that loses to him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on December 11, 2017, 08:58:13 PM
I can't imagine Moore wins. I think. How would you like to be the other guy that loses to him.

I don't think you understand how isolated Alabama is. I've been to Huntsville a few times, not a bad city but the drive there you're going through these incredibly poor towns. It's surreal, doesn't feel like you're in the US anymore.

UN investigated just how poor Alabama is.... (http://www.newsweek.com/alabama-un-poverty-environmental-racism-743601)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 11, 2017, 09:11:14 PM
I don't think you understand how isolated Alabama is. I've been to Huntsville a few times, not a bad city but the drive there you're going through these incredibly poor towns. It's surreal, doesn't feel like you're in the US anymore.

UN investigated just how poor Alabama is.... (http://www.newsweek.com/alabama-un-poverty-environmental-racism-743601)
Oh I know. Same goes for Arkansas and Mississippi. It's a different world.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 11, 2017, 10:17:44 PM
I can't imagine Moore wins. I think. How would you like to be the other guy that loses to him.

Two keys to this election:

-How many low-key voters turn out for Moore? As in people who support him but are smart enough to not do it publicly. People like them are hold to poll for.

-Can Doug Jones attract enough previously disaffected voters to put him over the top? "I'm not Trump" was a losing strategy for Clinton, and I'm not sure Jones learned from that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 11, 2017, 11:37:31 PM
Two keys to this election:

-How many low-key voters turn out for Moore? As in people who support him but are smart enough to not do it publicly. People like them are hold to poll for.

-Can Doug Jones attract enough previously disaffected voters to put him over the top? "I'm not Trump" was a losing strategy for Clinton, and I'm not sure Jones learned from that.

Because Clinton was an unlikeable queynte. Any other candidate with a pulse would have won that election going away. Nope instead our country is becoming more and more of a joke filled with racist ideations and catering to the 1% off the backs of the working stiffs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 12, 2017, 12:04:26 PM
The Joint Committee on Taxation has determined that even after allowing for the claimed economic growth it will create, the tax bill will add an extra $1 trillion of debt. (http://thehill.com/policy/finance/364343-congressional-scorekeeper-house-passed-tax-bill-wouldnt-pay-for-itself)

The Republican response is hilarious. "Yeah but they're always really conservative on their growth estimates." $1 trillion would be one hell of a miscalculation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 12, 2017, 12:30:15 PM
The Joint Committee on Taxation has determined that even after allowing for the claimed economic growth it will create, the tax bill will add an extra $1 trillion of debt. (http://thehill.com/policy/finance/364343-congressional-scorekeeper-house-passed-tax-bill-wouldnt-pay-for-itself)

The Republican response is hilarious. "Yeah but they're always really conservative on their growth estimates." $1 trillion would be one hell of a miscalculation.

I think the truth is somewhere between.  I still don't think it will pass, but I'm guessing that the growth will be better than expected, but not what the Republicans expect. 

GDP has been above 3% this year so far, which is more than most expected.  How much of that is carryover from the previous administration's policies?  Who knows.  Of course Trump is going to take credit for anything remotely good that happens from here out, regardless of his involvement because he is an egomaniac.  Small gains in GDP growth can make a significant difference from everything I've read though. 

In the end, I think this tax bill will die an embarrassing death because some Senate Republicans will back out in the end.  If it does pass, it will ultimately do a little good, but mostly line the pockets of businesses and corporation.  By the time that has happened, people will have forgotten about it mostly. 

/non-expert babbling
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 12, 2017, 04:57:10 PM
Someone explain to me how this makes any sense.

http://www.al.com/news/index.ssf/2017/12/in_final-hour_order_court_rule.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on December 12, 2017, 06:08:52 PM
Makes no sense JE

In true GOP authoritarian style, this jerkoff Merrill is going to declare a Moore victory 3 minutes after the polls close and before a single vote is even counted

Protecting his RWNJ party just in case his concerted effort to block actual voting fails

ASAP after his annoucement, all voting records will be destroyed

Welcome to the GOP Fourth Reich
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 12, 2017, 09:07:51 PM
Alabama election is really close. Looks like Jones will squeak it out. The margin will probably be less than the write in vote.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on December 12, 2017, 09:15:00 PM
Moore has the lead, but almost all the remaining votes are in Democratic-leaning counties.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 12, 2017, 09:21:19 PM
Jones is going to win. Very little Republican territory left and Jones is in the lead.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 12, 2017, 09:23:22 PM
It's over.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 12, 2017, 11:21:00 PM
I can not believe this was even close, it's sickening even in a win, frightening really.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 12, 2017, 11:59:19 PM
I can not believe this was even close, it's sickening even in a win, frightening really.
I hate it when Puck is the voice of reason.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 13, 2017, 12:05:43 AM
I hate it when Puck is the voice of reason.

Sometimes, rarely but sometimes, I cease to be an internet persona and give my real opinion on things.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on December 13, 2017, 02:39:19 AM
A massive Trumpster Fire is now officially burning in the United Stushhh
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 13, 2017, 05:26:40 AM
I can not believe this was even close, it's sickening even in a win, frightening really.
Less than 10,000 vote margin.

Edit: this number appears to be outdated. Just saw NYT show 21,000.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 13, 2017, 06:32:24 AM
Sometimes, rarely but sometimes, I cease to be an internet persona and give my real opinion on things.
Go back to being fake, please.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 13, 2017, 06:35:15 AM
Someone on Twitter said that the margin was so small that Roy Moore tried to molest it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 13, 2017, 06:48:20 AM
He still hasn't conceded. Bitter.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 13, 2017, 08:11:00 AM
Go back to being fake, please.

That's the nicest thing you ever said to me, Do you want to freak me or something, you bundle of sticks?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 13, 2017, 08:39:48 AM
That's the nicest thing you ever said to me, Do you want to freak me or something, you bundle of sticks?
I'll pass.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on December 13, 2017, 09:31:56 AM
Someone on Twitter said that the margin was so small that Roy Moore tried to molest it.

I heard the margin was so small it has Roy Moore coming in a little behind.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on December 13, 2017, 01:25:15 PM
I heard the margin was so small it has Roy Moore coming in a little behind.

I hate myself for thinking this is funny.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 14, 2017, 11:25:51 AM
Sometimes suicide is good.

https://www.npr.org/sections/thetwo-way/2017/12/14/570711172/kentucky-lawmaker-dies-in-apparent-suicide-amid-accusations-of-sexual-assault

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171214/7569fcacd1bd3401126f4de8ff6dbdb3.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on December 14, 2017, 11:46:16 AM
Glad this RWNJ is happy.

The girl he molested is probably happy too.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 14, 2017, 11:56:29 AM
Bomb threat at the net neutrality vote. lol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 14, 2017, 12:05:08 PM
Paul Ryan may leave DC in 2018.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/12/14/paul-ryan-retire-speaker-ready-leave-washington-216103
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on December 14, 2017, 03:36:23 PM
Hopefully after he and 75+ other Trump Toadies get their butts booted out of our House of Reps this November!

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 14, 2017, 03:38:29 PM
I would expect a reckoning to come for pretty much all incumbent politicians, it won't matter what party. I am hoping the change will be drastic and severe. Then again this country is really stupid so who knows.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 14, 2017, 05:20:20 PM
I would expect a reckoning to come for pretty much all incumbent politicians, it won't matter what party. I am hoping the change will be drastic and severe. Then again this country is really stupid so who knows.
Trump was a drastic change.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 14, 2017, 05:25:54 PM
Trump was a drastic change.

Not compared to whom he was running against. He ran against some of the all time worst candidates, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and the worst of all Hillary.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 14, 2017, 05:48:42 PM
Not compared to whom he was running against. He ran against some of the all time worst candidates, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and the worst of all Hillary.

I could see Rubio get another shot later if he wants to try again.

The rest of them are unsalvageable though.

Cruz easily had the best policy knowledge out of the Republican field but he's just so unlikeable and a not insignificant portion of their base prides itself on being anti intellectual.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 14, 2017, 06:00:41 PM
I could see Rubio get another shot later if he wants to try again.

The rest of them are unsalvageable though.

Cruz easily had the best policy knowledge out of the Republican field but he's just so unlikeable and a not insignificant portion of their base prides itself on being anti intellectual.

The Deomcrats are actually targeting Cruz in 2018 as a winnable seat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 14, 2017, 09:33:56 PM
Speaking of Little Marco, he's not being a complete piece of excrement with the tax bill.

https://www.wsj.com/articles/timing-of-tax-vote-next-week-is-up-in-the-air-1513279164
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2017, 09:39:27 PM
Not compared to whom he was running against. He ran against some of the all time worst candidates, Jeb Bush, Marco Rubio, Ted Cruz and the worst of all Hillary.
Wait.  What the freak dude?  I get you hated Hillary, but worse than Ted Cruz?  The only bacteria worse than Ted Cruz is president.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 14, 2017, 09:43:00 PM
Absoluetly anyone else not named Trump.
.
.
.
.
.
Hillary
Marco
Jeb
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Ted
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Trump

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 14, 2017, 10:27:43 PM
You forgot Ben Carson.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 14, 2017, 11:38:06 PM
Wait.  What the freak dude?  I get you hated Hillary, but worse than Ted Cruz?  The only bacteria worse than Ted Cruz is president.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Yeah if he beat her, she was a worse candidate. You fail to realize the only people that liked Hillary were the ones that had a huge D tattooed to the inside of their anus. She was an unlikeable queynte, that ran one of the worst campaigns of all time. The Dems made their bed and now have to lie in it. She was straight up garbage that had a crown bestowed on her, not earned by any stretch.

You seem to think that saying the above somehow is me exonerating Trump, that isn't the case at all. I hate Trump with every fiber of my being. He's a disgusting vile slob of a human being. He is going down as perhaps the single worst President of all time. His policies, the ones other than reversing ever single Obama era policy are complete horseshit. He's making this country more of a joke every day he breaths air in DC.

I would hate the stupid hateful racist idiotic slob component of America that voted for him even more if not for the simple fact, he ran against a person that's just as bad if not worse, Hillary. So don't blame me, blame your party for putting forth that steaming pile of excrement against him. If any other viable candidate ran, Biden, Rudolph the Red-Nosed Reindeer, Sanders, Bloomberg (even though he's Jewish) etc. etc. then Trump would be an afterthought right now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 15, 2017, 07:54:47 AM
Wait.  What the freak dude?  I get you hated Hillary, but worse than Ted Cruz?  The only bacteria worse than Ted Cruz is president.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk
Hot take: Ted Cruz would be a worse president for me than Trump. Populism prevents Trump from doing certain things that Cruz would love to do, like gut my career.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on December 15, 2017, 10:05:47 AM
Not to get into a useless argument, but it's ridiculous to say Hillary didn't deserve anything. She was an elected Senator and a Secretary of State. If you feel she stole the nomination, or that she had an unlikable personality, I'll accept those arguments. But saying she didn't deserve the opportunity is ridiculous.

Anyway, as for Republicans, I can't believe I'm going to actually write this, but I think the "savior" of the party is Mitt Romney. Never have I agreed with the guy, until this year. I still don't agree with his politics, but he at least acts like someone who would deserve respect, and that's what we need to get back to.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 15, 2017, 10:25:19 AM
Not to get into a useless argument, but it's ridiculous to say Hillary didn't deserve anything. She was an elected Senator and a Secretary of State. If you feel she stole the nomination, or that she had an unlikable personality, I'll accept those arguments. But saying she didn't deserve the opportunity is ridiculous.



freak you, the evidence she didn't deserve it was losing to Trump so eat my derriere.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 15, 2017, 04:59:32 PM
freak you, the evidence she didn't deserve it was losing to Trump so eat my derriere.
How did you vomit so many words out while completely missing my point?  I took exception to you saying hillary was worse than ted.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 15, 2017, 05:09:38 PM
How did you vomit so many words out while completely missing my point?  I took exception to you saying hillary was worse than ted.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



She sucked, she was worse than Cruz, Cruz was fringe and lost in the primaries, Hillary was a party nominee, and an all time bad one at that, so suck it.

 When it comes to politics you're a typical one note bitch. Add some nuance to your,"if it comes from a Republican" it must be bad stance and maybe we won't have a moribund country.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 15, 2017, 05:10:45 PM
Vote Puck 2020.  Make America Gay Again!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 15, 2017, 05:13:46 PM
Vote Puck 2020.  Make America Gay Again!

You can be my Vice-President, so when I get assassinated, the gayness only increases.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 15, 2017, 05:35:45 PM


She sucked, she was worse than Cruz, Cruz was fringe and lost in the primaries, Hillary was a party nominee, and an all time bad one at that, so suck it.

 When it comes to politics you're a typical one note bitch. Add some nuance to your,"if it comes from a Republican" it must be bad stance and maybe we won't have a moribund country.

Cruz is as horrible as they come.  I didn't like Hillary very much, but I'm in a purple state and wanted to stop Trump.

One note bitch?  I think not.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 15, 2017, 08:06:46 PM

Cruz is as horrible as they come.  I didn't like Hillary very much, but I'm in a purple state and wanted to stop Trump.

One note bitch?  I think not.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



Lets not quibble, 2 notes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 15, 2017, 08:08:25 PM

Cruz is as horrible as they come.  I didn't like Hillary very much, but I'm in a purple state and wanted to stop Trump.

One note bitch?  I think not.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



To be clear, if Cruz was on fire, I would not waste my pee on him. I think we can agree. If Hillary was on fire, I would pee on her and I think she would like it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 16, 2017, 10:09:44 AM
Hahahahahahahaha

https://www.yahoo.com/news/report-trump-bans-apos-transgender-053051424.html (https://www.yahoo.com/news/report-trump-bans-apos-transgender-053051424.html)

Quote
In an astonishing order, the Trump administration (https://www.huffingtonpost.com/topic/trump-administration/) has banned the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention from using seven words — including “fetus,” “transgender,” “diversity” and “science-based” — in any documents used to prepare the agency’s budget, The Washington Post (https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/cdc-gets-list-of-forbidden-words-fetus-transgender-diversity/2017/12/15/f503837a-e1cf-11e7-89e8-edec16379010_story.html?tid=ss_tw&utm_term=.9cfb6e3655e9) has reported.

CDC policy analysts were reportedly informed of the forbidden words in a 90-minute meeting in Atlanta on Thursday with senior CDC officials. The other banned words are “vulnerable,” “entitlement” and “evidence-based,” according to the Post, citing an unnamed policy analyst. The meeting was led by a senior member of the CDC’s Office of Financial Services. She didn’t know why the words were forbidden and said she was merely relaying information, the Post reported.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on December 16, 2017, 10:15:31 AM
Hahahahahahahaha

https://www.yahoo.com/news/report-trump-bans-apos-transgender-053051424.html (https://www.yahoo.com/news/report-trump-bans-apos-transgender-053051424.html)


Holy excrement. Obviously this is fuckin absurd but it's also fascist as freak. How could the Trump army not see that?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 16, 2017, 06:25:04 PM
LOL

http://bgr.com/2017/08/31/fcc-ajit-pai-memo/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 17, 2017, 07:37:27 AM
http://insider.foxnews.com/amp/article/59454?__twitter_impression=true
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 17, 2017, 09:14:35 AM
Omg- that moron is going to have that for life.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 17, 2017, 09:28:49 AM
sg3 sighted at a book signing.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171217/cadf3a42abd403aad522b6e6edd93765.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on December 17, 2017, 09:42:35 AM
sg3 sighted at a book signing.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171217/cadf3a42abd403aad522b6e6edd93765.jpg)

Reported
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on December 17, 2017, 10:10:13 AM
GFY

All of you

And

Happy Holidays
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 19, 2017, 01:44:11 PM
Normal family.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/12/sarah-palins-son-track-punches-through-window-beats-up-dad-in-dispute-over-truck.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on December 19, 2017, 03:08:29 PM
How do republicans call themselves conservatives anymore?  At least the lunatic fringe said they wanted to bring down the deficit.

When they go back to bagging groceries in Jan 2019, I hope they will reflect on what they did today.

Hope.  They won't.  Their barely middle class asses will still vote for Trump in 2020.

I know this is going to hit some of you guys hard.  I rent and don't pay state or local taxes.  I guess on the bright side you can all file a 1040ez now.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 24, 2017, 09:00:46 AM
https://www.politico.eu/article/obama-hezbollah-the-secret-backstory-of-how-let-off-the-hook/

Y’all forgot to post this one. Suprising lack of coverage by the fake news media.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 24, 2017, 09:10:01 AM
https://www.cbsnews.com/news/gift-wrapped-manure-addressed-to-treasury-secretary-steven-mnuchin-police/

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: sg3 on December 24, 2017, 09:18:15 AM
https://www.politico.eu/article/obama-hezbollah-the-secret-backstory-of-how-let-off-the-hook/

Y’all forgot to post this one. Suprising lack of coverage by the fake news media.
Shocking

A guy who roots for the Fat Cat Koch Brothers and big Richey Rich bankers also roots for the Pin$triper$.

Who wudda thunk it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 24, 2017, 09:19:55 AM
https://www.politico.eu/article/obama-hezbollah-the-secret-backstory-of-how-let-off-the-hook/

Y’all forgot to post this one. Suprising lack of coverage by the fake news media.

Because meh. The illicit drugs and weapons trade, covert operations and political manoeuvring have been bedfellows since time immemorial.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on December 24, 2017, 03:23:41 PM
https://www.politico.eu/article/obama-hezbollah-the-secret-backstory-of-how-let-off-the-hook/

Y’all forgot to post this one. Suprising lack of coverage by the fake news media.

It sounds like they chose nuclear safety over terrorism and drugs...  they have more information than we all do, So I'm okay with this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 29, 2017, 06:24:53 AM
It sounds like they chose nuclear safety over terrorism and drugs...  they have more information than we all do, So I'm okay with this.
We weren't in nuclear danger without the Iran Deal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 29, 2017, 06:25:32 AM
I don't understand this response.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20171229/ba1dbf1a7baf280aeef7d6cf6276792a.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 29, 2017, 08:23:46 AM
Best part of that exchange was Hillary knitting a car
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 29, 2017, 12:27:33 PM
Best part of that exchange was Hillary knitting a car
EXCUSE ME SIR

HILLARY HAS MORE TENACITY THAN YOU DO IN THE TIP OF YOUR PENIS

GOOD DAY SIR
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 03, 2018, 04:50:03 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/Statistar30/status/948420934238703616

Decent Dems and Sanders trying to save Net Neutrality, shitty Dems sitting on their hands.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 04, 2018, 08:31:37 AM
That coward Ajit Pai was supposed to do a town hall style sit down at the Consumer Electronics Show, but he abruptly canceled his appearance yesterday with no explanation. He's a straight-up piece of human filth. I reserve the word "hate" for very few things/people; I hate that guy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 04, 2018, 08:40:29 AM
That coward Ajit Pai was supposed to do a town hall style sit down at the Consumer Electronics Show, but he abruptly canceled his appearance yesterday with no explanation. He's a straight-up piece of human filth. I reserve the word "hate" for very few things/people; I hate that guy.

I hate you. lol

I agree, that dude is a coward. It's amazing how much power that punk has and used it to do something that 75% of the people are against is truly frightening. I would love to get a knuckleduster and break his jaw.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 04, 2018, 08:50:58 AM
Geez, I get not agreeing with it (I can't say I agree with it either), but why do y'all hate the guy?  Did he bang your Mom or something?  I think we'll survive.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 04, 2018, 09:01:47 AM
Geez, I get not agreeing with it (I can't say I agree with it either), but why do y'all hate the guy?  Did he bang your Mom or something?  I think we'll survive.

Has anyone ever told you to shut the freak up?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 04, 2018, 09:08:36 AM
Geez, I get not agreeing with it (I can't say I agree with it either), but why do y'all hate the guy?  Did he bang your Mom or something?  I think we'll survive.

If you don't really think the loss of net neutrality is that big a deal, then you don't understand the implications of it. It's got nothing to do with how quickly you can watch your Pornhub videos.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 04, 2018, 09:20:38 AM
If you don't really think the loss of net neutrality is that big a deal, then you don't understand the implications of it. It's got nothing to do with how quickly you can watch your Pornhub videos.

I never said it wasn't a big deal.  Maybe I worded this poorly but I'm talking about the hatred toward the individual.  Lots of people make bad decisions with big implications.  It's a whole different level to hate the dude.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 04, 2018, 09:21:16 AM
Has anyone ever told you to shut the freak up?

yes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 04, 2018, 09:36:31 AM
I never said it wasn't a big deal.  Maybe I worded this poorly but I'm talking about the hatred toward the individual.  Lots of people make bad decisions with big implications.  It's a whole different level to hate the dude.

Not really it's been his mandate from day one. I hate him and want to beat his smug derriere face to a bloody pulp. STFU
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 04, 2018, 09:40:47 AM
A former Verizon lawyer weaseled his way into a position to remove consumer protections from the internet. As JE said, it'll have wide-ranging implications, including but not limited to the suppression of free speech online, which is something anyone who is American should be outraged over.

And he did it with smug confidence. He actually had the gall to film a skit poking fun at the idea of being a long-game plant by the telcos. This was after ignoring the shitton of objections submitted to the FCC, and his administration using dead people to file comments in favor of what he was doing.

He is human filth, and worthy of hatred. There isn't a single redeeming quality to him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 04, 2018, 11:05:38 AM
Bo, sometimes the answer isn't somewhere in the middle.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 04, 2018, 11:35:28 AM
https://apnews.com/19f6bfec15a74733b40eaf0ff9162bfa

Quote
WASHINGTON (AP) — Attorney General Jeff Sessions is rescinding an Obama-era policy that paved the way for legalized marijuana to flourish in states across the country, creating new confusion about enforcement and use just three days after a new legalization law went into effect in California.

President Donald Trump’s top law enforcement official was to announce the change Thursday, people with knowledge of the decision told The Associated Press. Instead of the previous lenient-federal-enforcement policy, Sessions’ new stance will instead let federal prosecutors where marijuana is legal decide how aggressively to enforce longstanding federal law prohibiting it, the people said.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 04, 2018, 12:58:15 PM
Remember how I said I reserve the word hate? I hate Jeff Sessions too.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 05, 2018, 12:16:58 PM
That coward Ajit Pai was supposed to do a town hall style sit down at the Consumer Electronics Show, but he abruptly canceled his appearance yesterday with no explanation. He's a straight-up piece of human filth. I reserve the word "hate" for very few things/people; I hate that guy.

https://www.recode.net/2018/1/4/16850956/fcc-chairman-ajit-pai-ces-death-threats

Funny, I can’t find this story on CNN
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 05, 2018, 12:20:17 PM
https://www.recode.net/2018/1/4/16850956/fcc-chairman-ajit-pai-ces-death-threats

Funny, I can’t find this story on CNN

I saw that last night. When I posted, it was still completely undisclosed as to why he was skipping it.

I can understand cowardly backing out because his life is being threatened. But maybe he shouldn't have been such a queynte in the first place?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 05, 2018, 01:45:03 PM
I saw that last night. When I posted, it was still completely undisclosed as to why he was skipping it.

I can understand cowardly backing out because his life is being threatened. But maybe he shouldn't have been such a queynte in the first place?

Being a queynte is no excuse to threaten to kill someone.  And if someone threatened my life, I would certainly not feel any shame in "cowardly" backing out.  This is totally aside from agreeing or disagreeing with what he did.  I too think it is not the right thing to do, and I certainly wouldn't stop to help this dude change a flat tire, but death threats? 

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 05, 2018, 02:03:08 PM
Being a queynte is no excuse to threaten to kill someone.  And if someone threatened my life, I would certainly not feel any shame in "cowardly" backing out.  This is totally aside from agreeing or disagreeing with what he did.  I too think it is not the right thing to do, and I certainly wouldn't stop to help this dude change a flat tire, but death threats? 

This is where it gets complicated.

I don't condone death threats. The thing is, at some point, people are going to have to pay for their sins. Peaceful resistance only lasts so long before it becomes a violent revolution. What someone like Trump and the GOP did with the new tax law pisses people off, but they can hide behind their "ideology" as an excuse.

It's a lot harder for Pai to hide behind anything. There isn't anyone who isn't an internet service provider who is happy with what he did, so it's really not shocking that he's going to have made enemies. Once you have enemies, you risk them being irrational.

It is cowardly for him not to appear. It's not like security won't be high and every person/bag checked. I'm certain that this is a bullshit excuse because of the backlash he received when the announcement came. The original announcement was from another member of his administration, and she was very specific that it was due to "scheduling conflicts." He doesn't want to have to answer questions.

We're talking about a guy who had his administration literally use the identities of dead people to submit comments in favor of his plan. freak him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 05, 2018, 02:07:33 PM
My problem with the death threats is that they aren't legitimate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 05, 2018, 06:27:12 PM
On the plus side, club Sapphire is going to have 2 robotic strippers at CES.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 05, 2018, 06:37:06 PM
My problem with the death threats is that they aren't legitimate.

Hahaha, careful the snowflake bojanglesman might get upset and use harsh language.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 05, 2018, 06:43:34 PM
Hahaha, careful the snowflake bojanglesman might get upset and use harsh language.
Ha, dick.  We have a real group of killas up in here. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 08, 2018, 05:57:33 AM
Apparently Oprah will be the next president of the United States after a rousing speech she had at the Golden globes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 08, 2018, 06:12:08 AM
Also the Rock and Michelle Obama will be the next president because they were at the Golden globes too
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on January 08, 2018, 10:37:37 AM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DTCDpM7WAAEG6mD.jpg:large)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 08, 2018, 11:34:41 AM
You get free health care, you get free health care, everyone gets free health care!

I wouldn't be totally against it.  Yes, she's probably as narcissistic as Trump, but she's never bankrupted anything, is light years more intelligent, she leans progressive on most issues, and would cause a bunch of old white men to have heart attacks.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Italian Seafood on January 08, 2018, 02:19:23 PM
You get free health care, you get free health care, everyone gets free health care!

I wouldn't be totally against it.  Yes, she's probably as narcissistic as Trump, but she's never bankrupted anything, is light years more intelligent, she leans progressive on most issues, and would cause a bunch of old white men to have heart attacks.

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk



(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DTCTnqtV4AIgr_v.jpg:large)

She's a fighter for women.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 08, 2018, 03:53:48 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DTCTnqtV4AIgr_v.jpg:large)

She's a fighter for women.
SBTT

Sent from my SM-G935P using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 08, 2018, 07:29:55 PM
Being a sexual predator is definitely better than associating with one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 08, 2018, 11:36:01 PM
Being a sexual predator is definitely better than associating with one.

I will take your word on that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Italian Seafood on January 09, 2018, 10:38:06 AM
Being a sexual predator is definitely better than associating with one.

If you say so.

(http://conservativeread.com/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/BillClintonDebateFace.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 09, 2018, 12:38:40 PM
What's your point? Throw them both off the same wall for all I care.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 09, 2018, 05:44:46 PM


https://mobile.twitter.com/RealSheriffJoe/status/950760802763661312
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 15, 2018, 09:28:43 AM
Chelsea Manning is running for Senate lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 15, 2018, 09:00:20 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-switch/wp/2018/01/15/the-senates-push-to-overrule-the-fcc-on-net-neutrality-now-has-50-votes-democrats-say/?tid=sm_fb&utm_term=.694e31cd8496
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 15, 2018, 09:03:06 PM
Chelsea Manning is running for Senate lol

Republicans: Do not vote for Bradley Manning, he is a traitor.

Democrats: Do not vote for Chelsea Manning, she is a traitor.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 15, 2018, 09:35:21 PM
Republicans: Do not vote for Bradley Manning, he is a traitor.

Democrats: Do not vote for Chelsea Manning, she is a traitor.

We finally have bipartisan agreement on something. Can everyone at least get behind "don't vote for Chelsea Manning, on anything, for whatever the freak reason you feel like?"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 16, 2018, 07:59:02 AM
We finally have bipartisan agreement on something. Can everyone at least get behind "don't vote for Chelsea Manning, on anything, for whatever the freak reason you feel like?"

Doesn't matter because I don't live in Maryland and she won't win the primary anyway, but she'd be an improvement over most senators.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 16, 2018, 11:39:18 AM
Doesn't matter because I don't live in Maryland and she won't win the primary anyway, but she'd be an improvement over most senators.

Drain the swamp!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 16, 2018, 02:40:17 PM
Jersey's new governor got sworn in and fatso can go back to the beach. Apparently those of you who live there are going to have legal weed within 100 days.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 16, 2018, 04:29:24 PM
Not always a fan of Cory Booker, but epic beat down today.  Dumb bitch looked like a deer in the headlights.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 16, 2018, 05:03:08 PM
Not always a fan of Cory Booker, but epic beat down today.  Dumb bitch looked like a deer in the headlights.

"I cried tears of rage".  Really?  Nothing wrong with being upset, but that crossed over into grandstanding.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 16, 2018, 07:54:42 PM
"I cried tears of rage".  Really?  Nothing wrong with being upset, but that crossed over into grandstanding.
That's specifically why I am not always a fan of his.  He tends to cross the grandstanding line.

But this was different.  He was addressing an unqualified lying bitch, the day after MLK day.  He gets a pass on this one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 16, 2018, 09:37:23 PM
That's specifically why I am not always a fan of his.  He tends to cross the grandstanding line.

I don't care about the grandstanding, I care more about him voting against good healthcare legislation because he gets big $$$ from pharmaceuticals.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 16, 2018, 11:34:40 PM
I don't care about the grandstanding, I care more about him voting against good healthcare legislation because he gets big $$$ from pharmaceuticals.
I don't know my Jersey politics, so I don't know what happened there, but he fought tooth and nail against bad healthcare legislation at the federal level.  I doubt he's getting much from big pharm these days.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 17, 2018, 11:29:29 PM
I don't know my Jersey politics, so I don't know what happened there, but he fought tooth and nail against bad healthcare legislation at the federal level.  I doubt he's getting much from big pharm these days.

https://theintercept.com/2017/01/12/cory-booker-joins-senate-republicans-to-kill-measure-to-import-cheaper-medicine-from-canada/

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 18, 2018, 02:24:28 AM
https://theintercept.com/2017/01/12/cory-booker-joins-senate-republicans-to-kill-measure-to-import-cheaper-medicine-from-canada/
I'm not familiar with The Intercept, but if true that is messed up.  We need to get corporate money out of politics yesterday.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 18, 2018, 09:10:38 AM
I'm not familiar with The Intercept, but if true that is messed up.  We need to get corporate money out of politics yesterday.

Also we need to BREAK UP THE BANKS
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 18, 2018, 10:08:43 AM
Also we need to BREAK UP THE BANKS
Pretty sure you're being sarcastic, which is fine.

Are you a big proponent of Citizens United and lobbyists?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 18, 2018, 11:15:49 AM
Pretty sure you're being sarcastic, which is fine.

Are you a big proponent of Citizens United and lobbyists?


I would have to do some research to give this an educated response, but I’m not a fan of lobbyists or the idea of lobbyists.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 18, 2018, 11:19:51 AM
http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/18/politics/ronna-mcdaniel-mansplaining-cnntv/index.html

Yes! Yes! 2018, you beautiful bitch!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 18, 2018, 02:23:19 PM
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2018-01-18/mortal-again-christie-blocked-at-vip-entrance-to-newark-airport

Lol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 18, 2018, 03:46:29 PM
I would have to do some research to give this an educated response, but I’m not a fan of lobbyists or the idea of lobbyists.
I'm not in the all gazillionaires are evil club.  Many of them donate to campaigns against there own self interest.  The majority unfortunately go the other way.

I would like lobbyists to die in a fire.  And no, corporations are not people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 18, 2018, 03:48:24 PM
http://www.cnn.com/2018/01/18/politics/ronna-mcdaniel-mansplaining-cnntv/index.html

Yes! Yes! 2018, you beautiful bitch!
Not going to lie, that bitch deserved some mansplaining.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 18, 2018, 04:01:44 PM
Not all lobbyists are bad either.  Some of them serve a purpose to inform and educate government officials of the specific needs of certain groups that may not otherwise be known.  There's nothing wrong with serving the needs of your represented group to get what is fair.  It's unfair when a group has so many lobbyists and so much power financially that they can get what they want whether fair or not.

My wife and I met a lobbyist for a large insurance company recently.  We talked for a while about her job.  She lobbies specifically regarding women's health care coverage and the government.  Without going into detail, nothing about her job seemed nefarious at all.  She constantly talked about trying to help under-represented people get help and helping women keep their lady-parts doctor without having to drop them because certain doctor groups can't afford to continue to stay with an insurer.  That being said, I don't work with her, so she may be Dr. Evil the rest of the time, I don't know.

We have lobbyists in the veterinary field.  Not only are they not crooked, they suck at their job apparently because it's like pulling teeth to get simple things done in our field regarding drug laws.



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 18, 2018, 07:14:06 PM
Elected officials are supposed to serve their local constituents, not lobbyists making 6 figures showering them in money and gifts.  I don't care about the cause.  I'm sure some align with my politics, but I'm willing to lose them if the rest go with them.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 18, 2018, 07:20:34 PM
Elected officials are supposed to serve their local constituents, not lobbyists making 6 figures showering them in money and gifts.  I don't care about the cause.  I'm sure some align with my politics, but I'm willing to lose them if the rest go with them.
You can lump them all together if you like, I'm just telling you they serve a just purpose in some cases.  Certainly there are plenty of awful groups but you can say the same about politicians too.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 18, 2018, 10:44:47 PM
Elected officials are supposed to serve their local constituents, not lobbyists making 6 figures showering them in money and gifts.  I don't care about the cause.  I'm sure some align with my politics, but I'm willing to lose them if the rest go with them.



It's become a total freaking joke, a complete joke that our representatives don't represent jack excrement. Well other than special or their own interests.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 19, 2018, 10:03:29 AM
It's become a total freaking joke, a complete joke that our representatives don't represent jack excrement. Well other than special or their own interests.
My point exactly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 19, 2018, 10:37:57 AM
Re: lobbyists, I've been working with a lobbying firm for a couple of years now. There's nothing wrong with using them, but their use can be abused.

I have used them to get me access to ministerial offices, and in some cases ministers, in order for me to represent a particular commercial scenario that needs visibility at their level so that the decisions made at a very senior level are done so from a balanced perspective. I'm choosing my words very carefully here for obvious reasons, but suffice to say that if you're the chairman or CEO of a very large company that employs tens or hundreds of thousands of people, you can pick up the phone to the some of the highest levels of government and get a sympathetic ear. If you represent a competing vendor who has a different but equally valid perspective on the market and how government legislation and decision making will affect it, you sometimes need assistance to get that sympathetic ear. That's where lobbyists come in, and they're very useful.

Where lobbying really can run amuck is when they represent very powerful and/or wealthy special interests. The problem isn't so much lobbying as it is the ability to use power and influence to affect campaigns - lobbyists simply provide the voice to those interests. If you controlled election spending more tightly, you'd reduce the power of the special interests over the candidates and thus the lobbyists would be less relevant.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 19, 2018, 12:22:39 PM
Re: lobbyists, I've been working with a lobbying firm for a couple of years now. There's nothing wrong with using them, but their use can be abused.

I have used them to get me access to ministerial offices, and in some cases ministers, in order for me to represent a particular commercial scenario that needs visibility at their level so that the decisions made at a very senior level are done so from a balanced perspective. I'm choosing my words very carefully here for obvious reasons, but suffice to say that if you're the chairman or CEO of a very large company that employs tens or hundreds of thousands of people, you can pick up the phone to the some of the highest levels of government and get a sympathetic ear. If you represent a competing vendor who has a different but equally valid perspective on the market and how government legislation and decision making will affect it, you sometimes need assistance to get that sympathetic ear. That's where lobbyists come in, and they're very useful.

Where lobbying really can run amuck is when they represent very powerful and/or wealthy special interests. The problem isn't so much lobbying as it is the ability to use power and influence to affect campaigns - lobbyists simply provide the voice to those interests. If you controlled election spending more tightly, you'd reduce the power of the special interests over the candidates and thus the lobbyists would be less relevant.
All true.

However, the way our country and legislative system was established, was that representatives in congress are there to, you know, represent.  As a citizen of Nevada, my elected officials should not be lending an ear to a massive corporation in Illinois.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 19, 2018, 12:58:50 PM
All true.

However, the way our country and legislative system was established, was that representatives in congress are there to, you know, represent.  As a citizen of Nevada, my elected officials should not be lending an ear to a massive corporation in Illinois.


Sure they should. It's their job to make sure that those corporations are in the best place possible to succeed and create wealth and jobs for their constituents, which means they need to understand the challenges and opportunities those corporations are dealing with.

What they shouldn't be doing is taking any form of consideration from those corporations that will assist with their re-election in exchange for supporting legislative change that is in the interest of the shareholders rather than the employees.

And no, corporations are not citizens.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 19, 2018, 02:14:43 PM
Sure they should. It's their job to make sure that those corporations are in the best place possible to succeed and create wealth and jobs for their constituents, which means they need to understand the challenges and opportunities those corporations are dealing with.

What they shouldn't be doing is taking any form of consideration from those corporations that will assist with their re-election in exchange for supporting legislative change that is in the interest of the shareholders rather than the employees.

And no, corporations are not citizens.

This is all true.

I think the biggest problem with our system is the issue of disclosure.

I'm accepting that a corporation can donate to a campaign. Maybe that lawmaker is sympathetic to a specific issue that corporation faces. A corporation may not be a person, but it supports people.

But when a lobbying organization *coughNRAcough* can take money from Russia, then insert it into a presidential campaign via an account that is not legally bound to disclose its source? That's where the entire lobbying argument falls apart.

Every single dollar donated to every single campaign, from the President, to Congress, down to the smallest town's mayor should be public record. Period. It should be 100% illegal to hide where any money came from. Then individuals may decide based on actual evidence who they want to give their vote to.

You have to present an ID in CVS to purchase a Visa gift card--under terrorism related money-laundering laws. How the hell is a presidential campaign allowed to take money without it being traceable?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on January 19, 2018, 03:18:18 PM
This is all true.

I think the biggest problem with our system is the issue of disclosure.

I'm accepting that a corporation can donate to a campaign. Maybe that lawmaker is sympathetic to a specific issue that corporation faces. A corporation may not be a person, but it supports people.

But when a lobbying organization *coughNRAcough* can take money from Russia, then insert it into a presidential campaign via an account that is not legally bound to disclose its source? That's where the entire lobbying argument falls apart.

Every single dollar donated to every single campaign, from the President, to Congress, down to the smallest town's mayor should be public record. Period. It should be 100% illegal to hide where any money came from. Then individuals may decide based on actual evidence who they want to give their vote to.

You have to present an ID in CVS to purchase a Visa gift card--under terrorism related money-laundering laws. How the hell is a presidential campaign allowed to take money without it being traceable?

Do you think you should be required to present an ID in order to vote?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 19, 2018, 03:30:51 PM
Do you think you should be required to present an ID in order to vote?

Do you think that campaign financing is less of a thumb on the scale of American election process than voted fraud?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 19, 2018, 03:58:57 PM
Do you think you should be required to present an ID in order to vote?

I think it's a reasonable idea--with a specific condition.

A government-issued ID should be something every American citizen has a right to. If we all have to register for Selective Service at 18, why can't we also get an ID that says "Hey, I'm a legal adult and US citizen"? I'm not talking about a driver's license, just an ID card with your name, address, and a picture of your face. The financial barrier to acquiring an ID is, to me, the problem.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 19, 2018, 04:54:13 PM
Do you think you should be required to present an ID in order to vote?
That's a loaded question.  As long as the rules are applied equally I would consider it.  As it stands, I live in a relatively well off district, and am a clean cut white male.  I haven't been asked to present ID, ever.  It also takes me 15 minutes to vote, including the drive.

Make non DL cards free, and open more polling stations in the inner cities, as well as polling stations on college campuses, and we have a deal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 19, 2018, 10:46:18 PM
Was kind of expecting a midnight deal to be struck to avoid a shutdown but that's not gonna happen at this point.

Thankfully I'm essential personnel so I won't be furloughed, but if this drags on I won't get paid until it's over.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 20, 2018, 08:30:20 AM
Was kind of expecting a midnight deal to be struck to avoid a shutdown but that's not gonna happen at this point.

Thankfully I'm essential personnel so I won't be furloughed, but if this drags on I won't get paid until it's over.
Hopefully they will get this excrement figured out over the weekend. If you get furloughed we expect hourly fanspeak mocks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 20, 2018, 02:14:31 PM
Nobody wants a shutdown, other than Trump.  It will keep the news cycle off the investigations for a bit.

Glad the dems showed some balls for once.  I was sure they would fold at the last minute.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 22, 2018, 11:43:34 AM
Nobody wants a shutdown, other than Trump.  It will keep the news cycle off the investigations for a bit.

Glad the dems showed some balls for once.  I was sure they would fold at the last minute.

*showed some balls for 3 days
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 22, 2018, 11:46:49 AM
Looks like the gubment will be back open today.  At least for a few weeks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 22, 2018, 12:32:41 PM
*showed some balls for 3 days
Good enough for me.  They made their point, and now Turtle and Ryan have the spotlight on them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 22, 2018, 09:24:59 PM
Dems got nothing and any point they tried to make will not reach the people it needs to reach.

CHIP got funded though, which is good, but that should have been resolved ages ago. By sitting on it this long the GOP was able to use it for leverage to make the Dems look like the bad guys and create a false dilemma between CHIP and DACA.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 23, 2018, 03:38:54 AM
Dems got nothing and any point they tried to make will not reach the people it needs to reach.

CHIP got funded though, which is good, but that should have been resolved ages ago. By sitting on it this long the GOP was able to use it for leverage to make the Dems look like the bad guys and create a false dilemma between CHIP and DACA.
Chip got done, and they shortened the window for the next shutdown by a week.  Schumer got 3 dem senators running for reelection to get Turtle to say I Object to funding the military, and extending funding government.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 23, 2018, 12:34:06 PM
Fen, there's no way to frame this where the Dems don't look weak. Sorry, but they screwed up again, and frankly I'm sick of it.

The GOP may attack their own constituents, and the Democrats may generally have their electorate's best interests at heart. But the GOP are far better politicians, and it's not even close. And politics win elections. The supposed bloodbath coming in November isn't going to happen. It's going to be the Trump election all over again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 23, 2018, 01:16:23 PM
Fen, there's no way to frame this where the Dems don't look weak. Sorry, but they screwed up again, and frankly I'm sick of it.

The GOP may attack their own constituents, and the Democrats may generally have their electorate's best interests at heart. But the GOP are far better politicians, and it's not even close. And politics win elections. The supposed bloodbath coming in November isn't going to happen. It's going to be the Trump election all over again.
You really need to read up on what Schumer did after the Friday vote.  I obviously didn't do it justice.

He got Trump and Pence to lie, or just show they are ignorant idiots, when talking about military paychecks.  That was on Turtle.  I Object.

He got all of them to lie, or just show they are ignorant idiots, by putting 1 and 3 day extensions in play.  Quoth the Turtle, I Object.

They are shutting down the government on 2/8 if a vote on DACA doesn't happen.  Initially the CR was supposed to run through 2/15.

And CHIP is no longer in play as a hostage.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 23, 2018, 01:56:47 PM
Come on the Dems look like the biggest bunch of pussies I have ever seen. They stand for nothing and cave for anything. Who the freak would want those weak douchebags in charge of anything?

It's too bad the Republicans are slimey pieces of excrement to a man/woman or we would have a 1 party country.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 23, 2018, 02:26:52 PM
You really need to read up on what Schumer did after the Friday vote.  I obviously didn't do it justice.

He got Trump and Pence to lie, or just show they are ignorant idiots, when talking about military paychecks.  That was on Turtle.  I Object.

He got all of them to lie, or just show they are ignorant idiots, by putting 1 and 3 day extensions in play.  Quoth the Turtle, I Object.

They are shutting down the government on 2/8 if a vote on DACA doesn't happen.  Initially the CR was supposed to run through 2/15.

And CHIP is no longer in play as a hostage.

McConnell agreed to "consider" listening on DACA "at some future date." Tough negotiation the Dems did there.

If you think the GOP can't dance around bald-faced lying directly to the American people's faces and obvious incompetence you haven't been paying attention the past 14 months.

Come on the Dems look like the biggest bunch of pussies I have ever seen. They stand for nothing and cave for anything. Who the freak would want those weak douchebags in charge of anything?

It's too bad the Republicans are slimey pieces of excrement to a man/woman or we would have a 1 party country.

And this is basically what I'm talking about.

They don't "stand for nothing." Quite the opposite. The problem is, as you're saying, they are spineless and weak, so their message is lost in the face of loud-mouths on the right who operate under the guise of "straight shooters" with the ignorant masses.

The uneducated are easily influenced by the "toughest" people--or at least those they perceive as the toughest. The GOP figured that out a long time ago, and use it very effectively. Meanwhile, Chuck Shumer looks like the Cryptkeeper on the night "Tales from the Crypt" was canceled.

As I said, the GOP are far better politicians than the Democrats, and it's not even a close race.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 23, 2018, 05:09:13 PM


If you think the GOP can't dance around bald-faced lying directly to the American people's faces and obvious incompetence you haven't been paying attention the past 14 months.

This.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 23, 2018, 06:04:09 PM

This.
The difference is they forced Turtle, on the congressional record, to object to emergency clean votes on military paychecks, 1 and 3 day stays on the shutdown, as well commit to working on immigration, albeit weakly.

There was nothing to gain other than bad optics if the dems continued the shutdown.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 24, 2018, 01:44:48 PM
The difference is they forced Turtle, on the congressional record, to object to emergency clean votes on military paychecks, 1 and 3 day stays on the shutdown, as well commit to working on immigration, albeit weakly.

There was nothing to gain other than bad optics if the dems continued the shutdown.

You mean other than actually forcing the GOP to address legislation regarding DACA? Or maybe a Net Neutrality compromise? Or legislation for the opioid crisis? Or addressing Gillebrand's women's legislation? Or really, any issue that is actually a concern to liberals? Or not looking completely spineless?

The attitude you're showing is exactly how Donald Trump won the presidency. Liberals sat around thinking "the obstructionist party" had done irreparable damage to itself and was vulnerable. Instead, Trump got up on his tree stump, spilled a bunch of verbal diarrhea that basically amounted to "the brown people took your jobs and now they're coming for your lives" and stole the election. And now Senate Republicans are claiming victory over a Democratic attempt at a government shutdown--that Trump was mostly responsible for.

I'm pretty freaking liberal, but I spent months saying not "Donald Trump might win the election" but rather "Donald Trump is going to win the election." Liberals can't seem to grasp that conservatives will literally vote for a child molester over any candidate that leans even a little bit left.

If the Democratic leadership had even an ounce of sense, they'd have continued the shutdown with cries of "The GOP is willing to let the children of men and women deployed to the most dangerous areas on the planet to starve. All because they want to deport children who were born here through no fault of their own." But the Dems have no concept of spin.

I used to like Chuck Shumer. He's a spineless weasel.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 24, 2018, 04:32:21 PM
I understand where you are coming from, but the problem is Trump, not Schumer.  They had bipartisan deals twice that included CHIP, DACA and funding for the wall.  Both were approved by Trump until he folded to the extreme right.

The shutdown happened because 4 republicans voted no.  Schumer got what he could out of it.  The biggest problem is the democrats were lazy with their messaging.  They let Trump, Pence and Turtle get away with bold faced lies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 24, 2018, 08:37:35 PM
Cuomo gets one right.

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-signs-executive-order-protect-and-strengthen-net-neutrality-new-york
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 25, 2018, 01:28:47 PM
I understand where you are coming from, but the problem is Trump, not Schumer.  They had bipartisan deals twice that included CHIP, DACA and funding for the wall.  Both were approved by Trump until he folded to the extreme right.

The shutdown happened because 4 republicans voted no.  Schumer got what he could out of it.  The biggest problem is the democrats were lazy with their messaging.  They let Trump, Pence and Turtle get away with bold faced lies.

It's not lazy. The Democrats have no clue how to push a message. It's been that way for a long time now. Like them or not, people like Booker or Gillenbrand are great at pushing their message. But the party's voices are Pelosi and Schumer.

Cuomo gets one right.

https://www.governor.ny.gov/news/governor-cuomo-signs-executive-order-protect-and-strengthen-net-neutrality-new-york

Eh. It doesn't do much. It just means if a Verizon doesn't outwardly "adhere" to net neutrality principles, government agencies within the state shouldn't enter into contracts with them. It's certainly a step, but it offers zero protections to consumers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 28, 2018, 06:42:13 PM
Interested to hear thoughts on this:

https://www.axios.com/trump-team-debates-nationalizing-5g-network-f1e92a49-60f2-4e3e-acd4-f3eb03d910ff.html

Please no hurr durr Trump, just thoughts on a government built vs privately built 5G network.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 28, 2018, 06:45:28 PM
Interested to hear thoughts on this:

https://www.axios.com/trump-team-debates-nationalizing-5g-network-f1e92a49-60f2-4e3e-acd4-f3eb03d910ff.html

Please no hurr durr Trump, just thoughts on a government built vs privately built 5G network.

State owned transmission media? LOL. How do we go from handing control of internet throughput to private enterprise to hardcore socialism in one leap?

It's almost like this administration doesn't have the first freaking clue what it's doing......
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 28, 2018, 11:36:13 PM
State owned transmission media? LOL. How do we go from handing control of internet throughput to private enterprise to hardcore socialism in one leap?

It's almost like this administration doesn't have the first freaking clue what it's doing......

You don't say
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Fenwyr on January 29, 2018, 02:55:12 AM
You don't say
Yeah, I thought thought that was a given at this point.

"I'm going hire the best people,"

Proceeds to hire the worst possible person for every cabinet position.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 29, 2018, 09:52:57 AM
Yeah, I thought thought that was a given at this point.

"I'm going hire the best people,"

Proceeds to hire the worst possible person for every cabinet position.

Trump: So you deny global warming and CO2 buildup despite a plethora of evidence to support it? You don't think oil and coal pollute the environment and don't care if companies create super fund sites if they're profitable? You will give the coal and oil companies whatever they require You think the US should say freak the rest of the world and get out of the Kyoto Accord and flip them the bird over the Paris Agreement? Even though the US could and should be the world leader in green energy, freak it lets go back to the Industrial Revolution era fossil fuel, right?  So in no uncertain terms you have complete disdain for clean water and clean environment ad the people that want it?

S.Pruitt: Yes, that sums it up 100% accurately.

Trump: You're hired, I have the perfect spot for you as head of the Environmental Protection Agency!

...................

Trump: So you're against free and open internet? You don't give a excrement about 85% of the public wanting unfettered access to the internet? You're for the big service providers to do whatever they want, whenever they want and freak the public? You will do whatever you can, dishonest and all, to repeal Net Neutrality? Cable Providers can have the same broad powers as well, as long as they make money they can offer the public 1 channel for all you care?

Ajit Douchebag: Yes, absolutely, I will repeal Net Neutrality faster than you can unzip your fly when Ivanka's horny.

Trump: You're hired, head of the FCC.

You can do this very same exercise with probably a dozen more agencies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 29, 2018, 10:16:44 AM
Well so much for the no hurr durr part. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 29, 2018, 10:36:45 AM
Well so much for the no hurr durr part. 

"Please give your views on this thing that the Trump administration is thinking of doing without expressing any views on the Trump administration" is a dumb ask in the first place. The answer is that it's an incredibly stupid idea for the government to build, own and control the network. I don't even know why it's a discussion.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 29, 2018, 10:43:45 AM
Well so much for the no hurr durr part. 

k
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on January 29, 2018, 10:49:03 AM
"Please give your views on this thing that the Trump administration is thinking of doing without expressing any views on the Trump administration" is a dumb ask in the first place. The answer is that it's an incredibly stupid idea for the government to build, own and control the network. I don't even know why it's a discussion.

He's (Bo) a jackass don't even bother.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 30, 2018, 05:17:46 PM
Trump: So you deny global warming and CO2 buildup despite a plethora of evidence to support it? You don't think oil and coal pollute the environment and don't care if companies create super fund sites if they're profitable? You will give the coal and oil companies whatever they require You think the US should say freak the rest of the world and get out of the Kyoto Accord and flip them the bird over the Paris Agreement? Even though the US could and should be the world leader in green energy, freak it lets go back to the Industrial Revolution era fossil fuel, right?  So in no uncertain terms you have complete disdain for clean water and clean environment ad the people that want it?

S.Pruitt: Yes, that sums it up 100% accurately.

Trump: You're hired, I have the perfect spot for you as head of the Environmental Protection Agency!

...................

Trump: So you're against free and open internet? You don't give a excrement about 85% of the public wanting unfettered access to the internet? You're for the big service providers to do whatever they want, whenever they want and freak the public? You will do whatever you can, dishonest and all, to repeal Net Neutrality? Cable Providers can have the same broad powers as well, as long as they make money they can offer the public 1 channel for all you care?

Ajit Douchebag: Yes, absolutely, I will repeal Net Neutrality faster than you can unzip your fly when Ivanka's horny.

Trump: You're hired, head of the FCC.

You can do this very same exercise with probably a dozen more agencies.
Pai had a little help from Trump's predecessor.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180130/88fa42e2c769b779cc924c750cd7b9b1.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 31, 2018, 07:21:42 AM
Thanks Obama
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on January 31, 2018, 01:52:52 PM
The GOP is a literal trainwreck.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/train-carrying-gop-lawmakers-retreat-hits-trash-truck-n843311
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 01, 2018, 10:45:50 AM
The GOP is a literal trainwreck.
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/train-carrying-gop-lawmakers-retreat-hits-trash-truck-n843311
https://www.opb.org/images/upload/c_limit,h_1000,q_90,w_640/AP_18031636634695_bjbsnj.jpg
http://a.abcnews.com/images/US/amtrak-victim-carry-rt-ps-180131_27x16_992.jpg

https://cdn-images-1.medium.com/max/1600/1*d-iFYLh4BCHfdBhv9waTJQ.png
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 01, 2018, 10:50:34 AM
Who da fook is dat guy?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 08, 2018, 10:44:04 PM
We're 17 minutes away from another government shutdown and CNN is interviewing a Russian reality TV star who's going to run against Putin in Russia's next election.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Hobbes3259 on February 18, 2018, 10:54:18 AM
Cory Booker was elected to the Senate today, as if that race was ever in question.

In honor of that, I present my favorite moment of Hurricane Sandy:

(http://i.huffpost.com/gen/853722/thumbs/o-CORY-BOOKER-HOT-POCKETS-570.jpg)

Your civics teacher has returned. lol. Booker is a blowhard.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 22, 2018, 08:39:58 AM
https://www.politico.com/story/2018/02/21/bernie-sanders-trump-russia-interference-420528
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 26, 2018, 04:54:18 PM
Looks like there's more than one Republican who isn't too smart with the Twitter:

https://www.thedailybeast.com/georgias-lt-governor-threatens-delta-for-cutting-nra-ties

I'm no lawyer, but I wouldn't be wholly shocked if threatening to use legislative authority to specifically target a private enterprise for publicly declared political revenge isn't considered some kind of abuse of power.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 26, 2018, 05:31:20 PM
A few thoughts.

-lol triggered governor

-This whole pursuit of taking out the NRA discounts is the wussiest form of direct action, just liberal pat yourself on the back nonsense

-At this point I'm kind of bitter they had so many discounts available to them, I don't get excrement for being a federal employee. At least I have AAA.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 26, 2018, 06:19:28 PM
A few thoughts.

-lol triggered governor

-This whole pursuit of taking out the NRA discounts is the wussiest form of direct action, just liberal pat yourself on the back nonsense

-At this point I'm kind of bitter they had so many discounts available to them, I don't get excrement for being a federal employee. At least I have AAA.

You should check on that last one. A lot of hotel/rental/tourism type businesses have that discount, and I actually remember it being labeled as simple as a “federal govt” employee discount. Both of my parents were career federal government employees. Definitely possible that it’s not applicable across every department but it exists.

Just remembered- they get a discount on their phone bill, and have access to Navy Federal Credit Union loans and benefits even though they’re not military.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 27, 2018, 07:34:27 AM
You should check on that last one. A lot of hotel/rental/tourism type businesses have that discount, and I actually remember it being labeled as simple as a “federal govt” employee discount. Both of my parents were career federal government employees. Definitely possible that it’s not applicable across every department but it exists.

Just remembered- they get a discount on their phone bill, and have access to Navy Federal Credit Union loans and benefits even though they’re not military.
There's a beer garden in Astoria that has a 10% discount for feds. #blessed
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 27, 2018, 08:18:14 AM
To add to my other points, Delta losing a tax break isn't a bad thing either. We don't need to subsidize them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 27, 2018, 09:13:59 AM
There's a beer garden in Astoria that has a 10% discount for feds. #blessed

I assume they provide complimentary Tostitos as well
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 27, 2018, 10:25:26 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180228/f6bc605a9e7ea05647e6b0b4de05c262.jpg)

Old but... whatever
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 01, 2018, 07:01:38 AM
What do we want, GUNS!  When do we want them, NOW!

https://www.google.com/amp/www.foxnews.com/us/2018/02/28/georgia-teacher-in-custody-after-reports-shots-fired-at-high-school.amp.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 02, 2018, 09:49:27 AM
Looks like one of the lead contenders for Amazon HQ2, Atlanta, just got ruled out of the race.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/business/wp/2018/03/01/georgia-republicans-honor-their-threat-to-harm-delta-in-defense-of-the-nra/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 06, 2018, 05:25:07 PM
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/taibbi-russiagate-trump-putin-mueller-and-targeting-dissent-w517486

TL; DR The Russia investigation is being used to delegitimize any movement or POV that doesn't align with mainstream American politics.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 06, 2018, 06:54:17 PM
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/taibbi-russiagate-trump-putin-mueller-and-targeting-dissent-w517486

TL; DR The Russia investigation is being used to delegitimize any movement or POV that doesn't align with mainstream American politics.


Here's the thing about McCarthyism; it was born out of a big fat kernel of truth, that there were in fact significant efforts by the USSR to infiltrate Western politics and society at every level, and the fact that Joe McCarthy went full Salem shouldn't be used to gloss over that.

Those who ignore history and all that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 11, 2018, 05:27:13 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180311/cdde34f196bc813770486ad19a11fe87.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on March 11, 2018, 05:48:03 PM
That last line gives me hope. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 13, 2018, 09:35:31 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/special-election-results/pennsylvania/?utm_term=.f6121f64d7a9

Final results trickling in for the special election for Pennsylvania's 18th district
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 13, 2018, 10:05:38 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/special-election-results/pennsylvania/?utm_term=.f6121f64d7a9

Final results trickling in for the special election for Pennsylvania's 18th district

The best bit, which your link doesn't show but this one (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/13/us/elections/results-pennsylvania-house-special-election.html) does, is that the Libertarian candidate probably bled the votes that the Republican needed to win. Although there's no way this won't go to a recount.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 13, 2018, 10:50:16 PM
Why does Hillary keep falling
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 13, 2018, 10:51:16 PM
The best bit, which your link doesn't show but this one (https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/03/13/us/elections/results-pennsylvania-house-special-election.html) does, is that the Libertarian candidate probably bled the votes that the Republican needed to win. Although there's no way this won't go to a recount.

Reason Will Prevail!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 14, 2018, 05:25:09 AM
Why does Hillary keep falling

She really needs to go away.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 14, 2018, 10:51:20 PM
Why does Hillary keep falling

http://thehill.com/homenews/campaign/378259-dems-are-angry-over-hillary-clintons-latest-comments?amp
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 14, 2018, 10:52:20 PM
Can everyone please stop giving a excrement about the Clintons?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 14, 2018, 10:58:48 PM
Can everyone please stop giving a excrement about the Clintons?

They should walk into the ocean so people can stop taking about them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 15, 2018, 05:22:55 AM
Quote
She also insinuated that women who voted for Trump were motivated by "ongoing pressure to vote the way that your husband, your boss, your son, whoever, believes you should."

Lmaooooo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 15, 2018, 07:37:47 AM
For years ever since I was a kid I always had a strange fascination with what my parents told me was the first lady. Something back then as a child changed inside of me, once I saw her face on the television I felt a rush of boiling hot blood flow straight to my head. The way she would have her beautiful blond hair with the stern tone of voice that made you feel as if you were being commanded by a superior being to do bidding for their pleasure. For years growing up I somewhat obsessed with the women. I downloaded pictures of her off the internet and printed them out to stick on my wall. I would find all kinds of pictures of her and I'd lay in bed every night and morning just staring at her face. As I grew older I began to realize my obsession was more than some strange feeling of connection with this person I had never met before, it was much stronger and it was a feeling I had not ever been really aware of. I was sexually attracted to Hillary Clinton, around age 11 I guess you could say I came of age. You could say I started whipping my own cream if you will. Hillary Clinton was simply what I whipped my cream for. Years passed by, throughout school I kept it a secret. When real life females I knew for years liked me I would always turn them down. In the back of my mind thinking about Hillary and getting anxious to get home and stare at her. Fast forward a couple of years, Hillary's running for president. Oh my god if I could express the blissful pleasure I received knowing the women of my dreams may be in control of not only me but the whole country. I did everything I could to campaign for her, spread word about her and try to get as many people to vote for Hillary as possible. Sadly she lost that year, I was devastated. However at the young tender age of only 16 I received word from the Hillary campaign that they appreciated my efforts but most importantly, Hillary signed it. There it was in my hands, a signed letter of appreciation from the greatest women in the world, the women for whom I've lived for years in service to, Hillary Clinton. Seeing her signature sent shockwaves throughout my entire body, it felt like a wave of pleasure rolling over my shoulders. I kept that letter close and I sealed it away to preserve it. After a few more years I hear Hillary Clinton is running again. This time, I was personally contacted by her campaign to help them get Hillary Clinton to be the US president. I was all on it, I went to every house on the block teaching people about Hillary Clinton and why they should vote for her. Many people, many Bernie Supporters, all of them changed their opinions once I got to talk to them. I like to believe, I'm partly responsible for Hillary winning the primaries. So many people were almost as in love for Hillary as I was this past election. We were all so happy to serve such a intelligent women seeking to make the world a better place. Sometime near the end of the primary I was actually contacted by the clinton foundation themselves. Apparently I was offered a reservation at a meeting to speak to Hillary Clinton herself. My reaction was priceless, in my head I imagine my smile was from ear to ear. I started hyperventilating at the thought of talking to or better yet being next to Hillary. I had my parents help me get a nice suit, new haircut, even got my eyebrows done. About a month later it was time, I was on my way 200 miles away to meet the women of my dreams, who I had dedicated my self emotionally and physically to since I was a child. We traveled across the state and into a gated community on a private resort. When we pulled up to the address we were sent, all you could see is cars lined up as far as the eye can see. I stepped out, walked into the party looking for her. I did not see her at first, spent about 20 minutes waiting and keeping an eye out. At the very least I just want to see her, I said to myself. Just then out of no where appeared what appeared to me to be a goddess sent from heaven. As the sunrays shined on her from behind, I instantly knew it was her, Hillary Clinton. She gave a 5 minute speech on fossil fuels and corporate tax rates. The entire time I felt my lesser bulging in my pants attempting to free it's self as I thought about all the times I had released by self in tribute to her. She stepped down from the podium, and I knew I had to talk to her. So I made my way over to her, and then there I was. She began walking towards a table near me, I'll never forget how she walked. It was so elegant and graceful like something I had never seen before. Time seemed to be at a halt as I observed ever inch of her being. Noticing even the tiniest of details like a single split hair on the back of her head. I was nervous, but I knew I had to be calm and ready. Servers came out with a plate full of spaghetti. She ate it, and I sat there pretending not to watch. After she was finished I made my way to her. She made eye contact with me, and smiled. Her lips, teeth, cheeks, everything about that smile drove me crazy. It felt like I was going to let the devil do his bidding right there without any hands on help. But I controlled myself, I opened my mouth and said, hi. She responded with a reluctant hi that appeared somewhat skeptical of me, maybe she thought I was mentally disabled, I don't know. Then I told her how I helped her campaign and would go around getting people to vote for her. She thanked me, then she extended her hand in preparation for me to extend mine. I reached my arm out, I grasped her hand, and I shook it. Just then I felt an electric shock go up my arm into my chest. It was like she had just taken everything that I am, balled it up and squeezed it. I felt pure agonizing pleasure shaking her hand. Knowing my own desires will never be fulfilled by this beautiful goddess of a women. I forget what I said next, but no matter how hard I try to remember I can't. Whatever I said after that handshake, made her laugh. Not only did I get to see her in real life, but I got to shake her hand, and I hear her laugh. My life felt as if it was complete, if i died right then and there I'd die the happiest man alive. Never had I expected such joy to even exist in this world. This goddess of a women, who's so strong and powerful, who've I've dedicated my entire life to, had just acknowledged my presence by not only communicating with me but physically interacting with me. After that short interaction we both moved on. I never told her a word about how my life has been or the things I've thought about. I figured she would just think I'm some creep if i did. My pleasure and desires are not of her concern. Since then I've spent my life dedicated to her even throughout all the turmoil. I try my best to avoid any talk about her now in days, or even looking her up. There is too much hate that I can't stand to see. I know who she really is, and I will forever remember her as the women she presented herself to me as. My goddess, my love, Hillary Clinton.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 16, 2018, 10:13:36 AM
Quote
Hillary Clinton's visit to India suffered another setback this week as the former secretary of state fractured her wrist after slipping in the bathtub at the five-star resort where she was staying, according to a report by DNA India.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 18, 2018, 05:09:05 PM
Thank you for your service, enjoy your potato

https://twitter.com/USArmy/status/974995359444463616?s=20
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 18, 2018, 05:26:32 PM
Was that real life?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 18, 2018, 07:06:41 PM
Was that real life?

There's a drone strike at the end of the rainbow.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 20, 2018, 09:04:07 PM
https://www.gq.com/story/free-speech-grifting
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 23, 2018, 08:55:09 PM
https://twitter.com/mattytalks/status/977315899224084482?s=20
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 23, 2018, 09:13:58 PM
https://twitter.com/mattytalks/status/977315899224084482?s=20

I am uncontrollably laughing. Idk why but this is hilarious to me
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 23, 2018, 09:14:38 PM
I freaking clicked on the link and started laughing again
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 24, 2018, 07:02:27 AM
I freaking clicked on the link and started laughing again

...I learned to despise them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 24, 2018, 07:16:57 AM
Why is there a state amphibian?  Is there a state beer?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 24, 2018, 11:35:27 AM
Why is there a state amphibian?  Is there a state beer?
A guy from Utah would probably despise beer too.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 11, 2018, 07:53:59 AM
Paul Ryan will not seek reelection.

#Ironstache
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 11, 2018, 01:38:32 PM
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-election-healthcare-poll/exclusive-as-elections-near-many-older-educated-white-voters-shift-away-from-trumps-party-idUSKBN1HG1I6
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 11, 2018, 01:56:03 PM
(https://zipar.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/11/Screen-Shot-2016-11-10-at-11.03.09.png)

Source: HuffingtonPost.com
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 13, 2018, 02:31:04 PM
http://www.wwl.com/articles/louisiana-law-ban-sex-animals-wins-senate-vote-25-10

The key part of this story for me is that 10 Senators in Louisiana voted in favour of having sex with animals.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 13, 2018, 02:37:36 PM
http://www.wwl.com/articles/louisiana-law-ban-sex-animals-wins-senate-vote-25-10

The key part of this story for me is that 10 Senators in Louisiana voted in favour of having sex with animals.

I'm actually more surprised the vote didn't go the other way.

Also note, it deems that anal sexual intercourse between two humans is now not illegal.

The southern US is a cesspool.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 13, 2018, 02:44:36 PM

The southern US is a cesspool.

Take it easy chief.  Parts, yes.  All, no.  Parts of the Northeast are a cesspool too.

Also, I can't imagine any person would just vote against this without there being some backstory about why.  Maybe they left something out of this story or maybe there was other legislation in it that these others voted against besides the banging cows part.  If these 10 people just thought it should be fine for a dude to have a one night stand with a goat, then good grief....

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 13, 2018, 02:50:33 PM
Take it easy chief.  Parts, yes.  All, no.  Parts of the Northeast are a cesspool too.

You're in Virginia, aren't you? I make jokes about "the south" being anything south of NY, but in this case, I'm talking about the deep south. Louisiana, Arkansas, Mississippi. And even then, just where it isn't urban.

As for the Northeast, you're absolutely right. Massachusetts, apart from being home to the most detestable teams in the country, is effectively Alabama. Calling them Massholes isn't just a joke.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 13, 2018, 02:52:29 PM
Also, I can't imagine any person would just vote against this without there being some backstory about why.  Maybe they left something out of this story or maybe there was other legislation in it that these others voted against besides the banging cows part.  If these 10 people just thought it should be fine for a dude to have a one night stand with a goat, then good grief....

It has to be because it included legislation deeming anal sex between adults as no longer illegal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 13, 2018, 02:54:13 PM
Take it easy chief.  Parts, yes.  All, no.  Parts of the Northeast are a cesspool too.

Also, I can't imagine any person would just vote against this without there being some backstory about why.  Maybe they left something out of this story or maybe there was other legislation in it that these others voted against besides the banging cows part.  If these 10 people just thought it should be fine for a dude to have a one night stand with a goat, then good grief....



I am presuming it's linked to the other element of the story, that the previous law was struck down as unconstitutional because it also included sodomy and they're the kind of hardcore dickhead Christians who think that the government should be allowed to legislate the bedroom. I'd guess they're voting against it in principle because they want to keep the debate about outlawing homosexuality open, and in their fucked up narrative there's no separating it from bestiality just as long as no one catches them freaking their 17 year old rent boy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 17, 2018, 03:29:43 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/17/us/politics/supreme-court-deportations-trump.html

Quote
WASHINGTON — The Supreme Court on Tuesday struck down a law that allowed the government to deport some immigrants who commit serious crimes, saying it was unconstitutionally vague. The decision will limit the Trump administration’s efforts to deport people convicted of some kinds of crimes.

The vote was 5 to 4, with Justice Neil M. Gorsuch joining the court’s four more liberal members to form a bare majority, which was a first. Justice Gorsuch wrote that the law crossed a constitutional line.

“Vague laws,” he wrote in a concurring opinion, “invite arbitrary power.”

Justice Gorsuch had voted with the court’s conservative majority in February in a different immigration case, one that ruled that people held in immigration detention, sometimes for years, are not entitled to periodic hearings to decide whether they may be released on bail.

His vote in Tuesday’s case was not entirely surprising, though, as he has a skepticism of vague laws that do not give people affected by them adequate notice of what they prohibit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 20, 2018, 12:10:30 PM
The DNC has filed a civil lawsuit against members of Trump's campaign party, Russia, and Wikileaks. On the surface, it seems almost petty and insignificant, but it's actually kind of brilliant and far from what I usually expect from the Democratic party.

If people like Manafort, Kushner, and Trump Jr. have to testify under oath on a civil witness stand, Congress can't protect them with closed-door sessions. Every detail will be right in front of the media. Plus, the suit already has presented previously undisclosed information, such as the exact dates of the data breaches.

This is a tactic the Dems used against Nixon as well. The suit was settled on the day Nixon left office.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 22, 2018, 01:06:38 PM
https://t.co/N1SjwLB1gD

Quote
Alexander, who was born in Guatemala, but had been adopted and brought to the U.S. at eight months old, said he knew something was wrong when courtroom staff took fifteen minutes to check his Guatemalan identification card after only taking moments to check his then-fiance's.

"I didn't have my Green Card yet, so I gave them the I.D. I had been given and they took it back to the judge and next thing I know a constable is coming out and telling me he needs to detain me because I.D. didn't look real," Alexander told Newsweek.

"I tried to tell them it wasn't fake and that it was issued from the Guatemalan Consulate but they wouldn't believe me and told me I wasn't allowed to go anywhere or leave the building until I could show proof," he added.

Afraid the couple wouldn't be able to go on with their wedding, Krisha, 23, raced home to get Alexander's paperwork and prove he was in the U.S. legally. But she says as soon as she left, Judge Elizabeth Beckley, who had been meant to marry the young couple, called Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) to have her fiance arrested.

Krisha said ICE officers "scared the hell out of [Alexander]," when they showed up, threatening to take him to an immigration detention center if they couldn't confirm he was in the U.S. legally.

Alexander said officers fingerprinted him without asking for his permission and warned him that instead of celebrating his wedding, he could end up spending the evening at an immigration detention center in Harrisburg.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 26, 2018, 02:30:23 PM
special boy (@HonoredSpirit) Tweeted:
because we live in hell i have downloaded the campaign ad for white supremacist Paul Nehlen, who paid Diamond and Silk $7000 for it. enjoy https://t.co/GweDKtIwux https://twitter.com/HonoredSpirit/status/989555333935894529?s=17
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 27, 2018, 08:54:15 PM
In light of our president brokering peace between mj and myself, I present this:

https://theintercept.com/2018/04/24/msnbcs-joy-reid-claims-her-website-was-hacked-and-bigoted-anti-lgbt-content-added-a-bizarre-story-liberal-outlets-ignore/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 29, 2018, 08:37:36 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180430/d9a0a3da435047b97d82303229f05c15.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on April 30, 2018, 10:58:39 PM
I don’t have the energy (on here) to express how chickenly excrement coward most of the press and mainstream media are. Michelle Wolf absolutely killed at the WHCD and nearly everyone of these snakely opportunists tried to manipulate the content of her jokes. It is an insane logical position to normalize a fascist and the ones who pedal lies on her behalf and then say Wolf’s set was mean spirited

Maggie Haberman is a very bad person
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 30, 2018, 11:23:12 PM
I just listened to her and it was pretty funny and as a rule I don't like women comedians too much.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on May 01, 2018, 01:10:22 AM
I don't like women comedians too much.

This is a horrendously bad take.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on May 01, 2018, 01:21:31 AM
I half assume you’re kidding but the amount of people who genuinely feel that way is alarming.

The problem is the funniest women either don’t get booked by club owners or are less likely to get a TV deal or get harassed out of the industry. It’s like there can only be one famous female stand up comedian at a time and everyone else has to wait. Then the public shits on the ones who make it (Amy Schumer, Nikki Glaser, etc) because they’re not “the best” but it’s not their fault they got elevated and no one else did. It is a product of the industry trying to find attractive people who happen to be funny.

Female comics that can survive how horrible comedy and humanity is in general are usually not to be fucked with.  The way men (and other women) treat female comics at clubs is really bad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on May 01, 2018, 01:29:43 AM
This is a horrendously bad take.

Yeah oddly enough it's not. I find a lot of them not too funny. I can make a list. They're just not my style of comedy, usually.

How they're treated by male comics is a separate issue.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on May 01, 2018, 01:33:51 AM
Yeah oddly enough it's not. I find a lot of them not too funny. I can make a list.

You can make a list of mainstream comics you’re exposed to that are likely cute and got TV shows. They are also probably funny but since they’re the only female comic you’re exposed to so you grade them on a Richard Pryor/ Bill Hicks curve.

There are tons of funny female comics that you simply haven’t heard of because they don’t get the late night shows or sets as much

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on May 01, 2018, 01:42:50 AM
Yeah oddly enough it's not. I find a lot of them not too funny. I can make a list. They're just not my style of comedy, usually.

How they're treated by male comics is a separate issue.

This part isn’t important as how they’re treated by club owners and bookers and TV execs.

Read this. Laurie is one of the funniest people working in comedy.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/opinion/sunday/louis-ck-harassment.html

(Yes I love trashing Haberman a few posts ago and still linking to the NYT)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on May 01, 2018, 01:55:58 AM
This part isn’t important as how they’re treated by club owners and bookers and TV execs.

Read this. Laurie is one of the funniest people working in comedy.

https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/opinion/sunday/louis-ck-harassment.html (https://mobile.nytimes.com/2017/11/10/opinion/sunday/louis-ck-harassment.html)

(Yes I love trashing Haberman a few posts ago and still linking to the NYT)

I know, I read the first part of it. It's not just comedy and it's a shame. Thankfully in this era, men that do that excrement are finally starting to pay the price. I saw it first hand in the financial industry. excrement I have good friends (gals) that I protected from that excrement and will be my friends until the day I die.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 01, 2018, 06:21:56 AM
Nathan J. Robinson did a good piece on Wolf's set and the reaction to it.

https://www.currentaffairs.org/2018/04/what-being-politically-incorrect-actually-looks-like
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on May 01, 2018, 11:23:24 AM
I like Nathan J Robinson a lot. Current Affairs is a legit publication. He torched Jordan Peterson in a thorough and intellectually sound manner
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 01, 2018, 01:42:56 PM
Look at these little babies.

http://thehill.com/homenews/media/385636-the-hill-to-end-attendance-at-white-house-correspondents-dinner-without-major
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 01, 2018, 02:26:26 PM
Quote
There is still a lot of thinking on the right that if big corporations are happy, they’re going to take the money they’re saving and reinvest it in American workers. In fact they bought back shares, a few gave out bonuses; there’s no evidence whatsoever that the money’s been massively poured back into the American worker.

Quote from well known libtard commie Marco Rubio in pinko leftist rag The Economist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 01, 2018, 03:23:57 PM
Quote from well known libtard commie Marco Rubio in pinko leftist rag The Economist.

My twitter feed blew up about this. Part of me is like "Good! I'm glad someone is finally growing a backbone in that party" and part of me is like "Motherfuckers! We all knew this excrement was going to happen, and you did too, and you did it any damn way!"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 01, 2018, 06:58:52 PM
I like Nathan J Robinson a lot. Current Affairs is a legit publication. He torched Jordan Peterson in a thorough and intellectually sound manner

What.

I read that article. On top of completely misinterpreting and taking excerpts of the book out of context, it was the usual denial of basic societal and biological norms that the side of science has come to adopt.

FFS, This place never fails to come off like the derriere end of r/pol.

I don’t have the energy (on here) to express how chickenly excrement coward most of the press and mainstream media are. Michelle Wolf absolutely killed at the WHCD and nearly everyone of these snakely opportunists tried to manipulate the content of her jokes. It is an insane logical position to normalize a fascist and the ones who pedal lies on her behalf and then say Wolf’s set was mean spirited

Maggie Haberman is a very bad person

Ah, I see you're part of the "EVERYONE I DON'T LIKE IS A FASCIST" crowd. Not sure if that's as hilarious as the idea that the mainstream press somehow carries water for Trump. Hilarious! Carry on.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 01, 2018, 08:36:13 PM
Clean your room mj
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on May 01, 2018, 11:47:08 PM
FFS, This place never fails to come off like the derriere end of r/pol.

r/iamverysmart
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on May 03, 2018, 01:32:30 AM
Sam Harris and Jordan Peterson flunkies are some of the saddest people on earth. I guess the only thing worse is Ben Shapiro flunkies.

They are a stupid person’s idea of a smart person. Their positions are either so convoluted that there’s no salient point, or they’re so rudimentary that every 10 year old knows it already. Dumb people aren’t able to sift through their boring prose to see that they’re full of excrement and in the case of the former 2, just entirely repackaging old Jungun or Eastern philosophies.

It only took 2 lines for MJ to come with the cliche “out of context” these charlatans use to be evasive about the shaky status of their fundamental ideas. It’s like waving a sign, “I don’t know what the freak I’m talking about so I need a pseudointellectual to simplify life in a box for me”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 03, 2018, 06:26:12 PM
When you’re such a regressive lady garden you even have a problem with SAM HARRIS. Wow.

Anyway, you think we’re under the throes  of fascism, so I’ll go ahead and place the same value on any insult you want to lob at me as I would a Browning Nagle rookie card. But tell me this my intellectual savior, if Pedersons positions are so convoluted or rudimentary, (a contradiction in itself) why the need to misrepresent them, and mask your idiocy with nothing but insults?

Believe me, you’re nowhere near as intelligent as you think you are.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on May 03, 2018, 06:40:50 PM
When you’re such a regressive lady garden you even have a problem with SAM HARRIS. Wow.

Anyway, you think we’re under the throes  of fascism, so I’ll go ahead and place the same value on any insult you want to lob at me as I would a Browning Nagle rookie card. But tell me this my intellectual savior, if Pedersons positions are so convoluted or rudimentary, (a contradiction in itself) why the need to misrepresent them, and mask your idiocy with nothing but insults?

Believe me, you’re nowhere near as intelligent as you think you are.

Ok Donny, nice projection here. Maybe see a therapist?  Not Jordan Peterson.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 03, 2018, 07:02:16 PM
When you’re such a regressive lady garden you even have a problem with SAM HARRIS. Wow.


Sam Harris is a smart guy with some bad ideas. Jordan Peterson is a cynic who has done a great job of monetising the role of being the respectable face of angry neckbeards. I'm not sure I'd necessarily equate the two completely, but I can understand why people have issues with them both. I certainly do, but I'd be happy to sit and talk with Harris; Peterson, not so much.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 03, 2018, 08:13:01 PM
Ever relevant

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180504/610dfcab7602e00d7719468e481e7042.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on May 03, 2018, 09:18:01 PM
Perfect
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 03, 2018, 09:19:34 PM
Ever relevant

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180504/610dfcab7602e00d7719468e481e7042.jpg)

Admittedly, considering the standard that the Left Can't Meme, this one is strong. Or as the kids say, dank.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: JFIF on May 03, 2018, 09:32:46 PM
Admittedly, considering the standard that the Left Can't Meme, this one is strong. Or as the kids say, dank.

Well you know what they say about the right wing: No one is funnier. Mussolini’s bit about Austrian suit pressers is a classic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 03, 2018, 09:39:35 PM
Well you know what they say about the right wing: No one is funnier. Mussolini’s bit about Austrian suit pressers is a classic.

His "we have guns they have spears" routine is indeed a barrel of laughs.

Anyway, I should thank him considering my great-grandparents left in order to escape actual fascism, so without him I guess I wouldn't be here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 04, 2018, 08:32:51 AM
Admittedly, considering the standard that the Left Can't Meme, this one is strong. Or as the kids say, dank.

I know a guy who checks every single one of those boxes, Jordan Peterson was the last one he added to his repertoire. Had to take him off my FB feed after that, good thing too since it was right before the IDF started sniping Palestinian protesters which I'm sure he was a big fan of.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 06, 2018, 10:25:34 PM
Look up Representative Kelly Townsend on Facebook for some laughs. Well really just one laugh. Or a confused grunt.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on May 06, 2018, 10:27:19 PM
Look up Representative Kelly Townsend on Facebook for some laughs. Well really just one laugh. Or a confused grunt.

Thanks, I'll pass
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 07, 2018, 06:46:55 AM
Thanks, I'll pass

She's a furry, you'd probably be into that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on May 07, 2018, 07:43:37 AM
She's a furry, you'd probably be into that.
CLANG
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 07, 2018, 08:02:35 AM
CLANG
KRANG
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on May 07, 2018, 11:08:51 AM
She's a furry, you'd probably be into that.

More like the other way around.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 07, 2018, 11:16:57 AM
More like the other way around.
Puck is a furry and this girl has no interest in him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 07, 2018, 08:50:43 PM
"New York Gov. Andrew Cuomo called on New York Attorney General Eric Schneiderman to resign Monday night after the New Yorker published an article in which four women alleged he physically abused them."
***
"(Reuters) - New York State Attorney General Eric Schneiderman said on Monday in response to an article in the New Yorker magazine in which four women were quoted as saying he physically abused them that he has "not assaulted anyone," and Governor Andrew Cuomo later called for him to resign and said he would begin an investigation.

“In the privacy of intimate relationships, I have engaged in role-playing and other consensual sexual activity," Schneiderman said in a statement issued by public relations firm Stu Loeser & Co.

"I have not assaulted anyone. I have never engaged in non-consensual sex, which is I line I would not cross." Schneiderman's office referred calls for comment to Loeser's office."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 07, 2018, 09:12:07 PM
Aaaand he resigned.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 07, 2018, 09:18:13 PM
Trump's going to love that one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 07, 2018, 09:39:04 PM
Trump's going to love that one.

Unless Preet Bharara gets appointed in his place.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 07, 2018, 09:41:00 PM
Unless Preet Bharara gets appointed in his place.

Oh man, that would be so much fun.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 14, 2018, 04:31:06 PM
Oh man, that would be so much fun.

Sounds like a Preet doesn't want the job.

Zephyr Teachout is exploring a run for the position in the fall. I'd vote for her.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 16, 2018, 10:17:54 AM
Two DSA members in Pittsburgh won their Dem primaries for House Rep seats, and they don't have opponents in the general election this fall.

WaPo headline: "Energized Democrats settle crowded Pa. contests, back women two years after Clinton loss"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 21, 2018, 02:23:03 PM
Supreme Court freaking the American worker today, thanks Obama.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 21, 2018, 08:09:14 PM
Supreme Court freaking the American worker today, thanks Obama.

You really need to hope that RBG doesn't die before you can get these shitheads out of power.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 22, 2018, 11:16:15 AM
You really need to hope that RBG doesn't die before you can get these shitheads out of power.

This terrifies me.

Losing the Gorsuch seat was criminal. And you know the right is just salivating at the idea of taking the Ginsberg seat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 22, 2018, 11:32:59 AM


This terrifies me.

Losing the Gorsuch seat was criminal. And you know the right is just salivating at the idea of taking the Ginsberg seat.

I'm pretty sure Ginsberg is a cyborg that can't be killed by conventional weapons.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 24, 2018, 03:54:12 PM
http://thehill.com/latino/389153-border-patrol-agent-shoots-and-kills-migrant-woman-in-texas
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 26, 2018, 09:11:17 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180527/079405b6a35dd7614c3ce10f5dc96ba2.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 31, 2018, 07:39:56 AM
Whipped

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2018/05/31/finally-know-who-mitt-romney-voted-for-presidential-election/XskSDUqfPTrt2IfigqgbpK/story.html

Quote
For the first time, Mitt Romney has publicly shared the person he voted for on Election Day 2016: his wife, Ann Romney.

The former Massachusetts governor and 2012 Republican presidential nominee revealed his vote Wednesday in an interview with the editorial boards of the Deseret News and KSL-TV in Utah.

Romney, who is a candidate for US Senate in Utah, had previously said he would not vote for President Trump or former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, but he had not shared the name of the person who did get his vote.

“I wrote in the name of a person who I admire deeply, who I think would be an excellent president,” Romney told the editorial boards in a response to a question. “I realized it wasn’t going to go anywhere, but nonetheless felt that I was putting in a very solid name.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 01, 2018, 07:25:03 AM
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/nathan-larson-congressional-candidate-pedophile_us_5b10916de4b0d5e89e1e4824
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 01, 2018, 07:58:21 AM
I read about him last night. Just... wtf.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 01, 2018, 09:13:52 AM
Unbelievable that he's so brazen about something so disgusting.  He's about to have a world of excrement rain down on him from the public.  He's not some anonymous dark web dude now.  I can't imagine the police won't be able to find something to arrest this dude for.  He needs to be in jail ASAP before someone else gets molested or hurt. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 01, 2018, 09:34:07 AM
He's about to have a world of excrement rain down on him from the public.

How long before Dinesh D'Souza endorses him?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 01, 2018, 09:39:49 AM
This terrifies me.

Losing the Gorsuch seat was criminal. And you know the right is just salivating at the idea of taking the Ginsberg seat.

HAHAHA CRIMINAL!

Out of curiosity, where do you get this hyperbole from?

I love the idea that parties in power shouldn't operate from their position. The GOP had a Senate majority, they were wholly within their right to not let Garland take the bench, especially considering his views on the Heller decision. As some clown with no remaining legacy once said, "elections have consequences."

Now, should they have granted Garland at the very least a confirmation hearing? Probably.  But considering the result was a forgone conclusion, and how such a hearing would've been portrayed by a media completely in the bag, why bother?

By the way, the sooner that intellectually bankrupt fossil gets off the bench, the better off we'll be.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 01, 2018, 09:54:12 AM
HAHAHA CRIMINAL!

Out of curiosity, where do you get this hyperbole from?

I love the idea that parties in power shouldn't operate from their position. The GOP had a Senate majority, they were wholly within their right to not let Garland take the bench, especially considering his views on the Heller decision. As some clown with no remaining legacy once said, "elections have consequences."

Now, should they have granted Garland at the very least a confirmation hearing? Probably.  But considering the result was a forgone conclusion, and how such a hearing would've been portrayed by a media completely in the bag, why bother?

By the way, the sooner that intellectually bankrupt fossil gets off the bench, the better off we'll be.

EDIT: Nah, forget it. It's not worth it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 01, 2018, 09:57:23 AM
On a different note, Betsy DeVos can't get any of her initiatives through the Republican-majority led Congress, so she's now determined to use her office's powers to make wholesale changes to the education system, regardless of what anyone else thinks.

The party of less government regulation, ladies and gentlemen.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 01, 2018, 10:42:13 AM
EDIT: Nah, forget it. It's not worth it.

No, seriously, I'd love to hear your case on how the Senate should act as a rubber stamp for judicial appointments to our highest bench, and whatever historical precedence you could provide for doing so. Tell me, how many years has Robert Bork been on the bench?

Now, if you want to talk about disgustingly partisan behavior from unelected officials, lets talk about how the sitting New York Attorney General actually called the entire concept of double jeopardy a freaking "loophole" yesterday because she didn't like the way the President was using his constitutionally afforded pardon power, before actually suggesting that the New York legislature do something about it.

HAHA! Real "liberal" take there. Lets just get rid of the entire concept of double jeopardy. "Hey, we know that this guy just secured an acquittal, but we'll just try it again LOL!" What a crock of utter horseshit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 01, 2018, 10:48:03 AM
No, seriously, I'd love to hear your case on how the Senate should act as a rubber stamp for judicial appointments to our highest bench, and whatever historical precedence you could provide for doing so. Tell me, how many years has Robert Bork been on the bench?

Now, if you want to talk about disgustingly partisan behavior from unelected officials, lets talk about how the sitting New York Attorney General actually called the entire concept of double jeopardy a freaking "loophole" yesterday because she didn't like the way the President was using his constitutionally afforded pardon power, before actually suggesting that the New York legislature do something about it.

HAHA! Real "liberal" take there. Lets just get rid of the entire concept of double jeopardy. "Hey, we know that this guy just secured an acquittal, but we'll just try it again LOL!" What a crock of utter horseshit.

I just knew you wouldn't be able to keep control of yourself.

EDIT: Damnit. No. I'm not getting roped into this with you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on June 01, 2018, 11:56:22 AM
Now, should they have granted Garland at the very least a confirmation hearing? Probably.  But considering the result was a forgone conclusion, and how such a hearing would've been portrayed by a media completely in the bag, why bother?

It is fascinating that Senator Orrin Hatch, in laying out his many fantastic reasons for the GOP to not consider any Obama nominee, invoked Garland as the type of moderate judge that the Supreme Court needed. Hatch, of course, has previously called Garland a "consensus nominee."

The problem with the parties in power operating from their position, as you so eloquently put it, is that when their position only exists in opposition to the other political party, they have clear incentives to increase their own influence and power by being antagonistic instead of solving problems. That destructive impulse, while it consolidates their rhetoric power within their base, leads to less faith in politicians from the majority of citizens, which leads to further divisive party politics, which leads to elections won by the most divisive and inflammatory candidates.

If parties operating from their position meant a good-faith effort to improve the opportunities given to all citizens, despite contrasting ideas of how those improvements would manifest, there would be no problem. But when parties operating from their position means doing whatever you can to strengthen the echo-chamber of your base and out-rhetoric your opponents, that is a massive problem.

Both Democrats and Republicans do this, of course. But the difference is that Republicans in power tend to play towards their rhetorical base, whereas Obama tripped over himself (and lost the enthusiastic support of many potential left-wing voters for his entire party) trying to play the role of a left-leaning, pro-free-market, across-the-aisle centrist.

Furthermore, your rephrasing of Barbara Underwood's double jeopardy statement/the NY AG's general position regarding double jeopardy as it applies to presidential pardons is exactly the type of word-twisting and deciding to not see the nuance that enables the brazen partisanship that we see in politics. She very clearly didn't call the entire concept of double jeopardy a loophole, but was, in a manner consistent with the position of the NY AG office, expressing a desire to eliminate a specific circumstance which has previously been considered to be part of double jeopardy in NY.

Schneiderman wrote, of course "New York’s statutory protections could result in the unintended and unjust consequence of insulating someone pardoned for serious federal crimes from subsequent prosecution for state crimes—even if that person was never tried or convicted in federal court, and never served a single day in federal prison." This isn't an indictment of double jeopardy conceptually, nor did it call the entirety of double jeopardy a loophole, but that there are specific unintended consequences to the current laws that include states losing power to the executive branch of the federal government via the executive pardon.

But of course, the NY AG office is getting rid of all of double jeopardy, according to some pundit you decided to listen to.

Furthermore, tying the concept of double jeopardy to a "liberal" cause is yet another example of the rhetoric you used being exactly the same rhetoric so easily manipulated by politicians in power.

Again, I'm happy to say that I am ideologically significantly left of the Democratic party. Democrats have their fair share of horrific politicians and asinine ideas, but I do have a lot more sympathy toward them than I do the Republican Party. However, I criticize you for being overtly partisan not because I don't see the partisanship of posters like Alio, but because your specific brand of toxic partisanship combined with this seemingly deep rooted desire to appear well-informed and nuanced (I can't wait to see which 'alternative/intellectual' centrist-ish political blogger you cite on a barely related tangent next) is just so deeply hypocritical and discouraging to read.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 02, 2018, 08:46:00 AM
It is fascinating that Senator Orrin Hatch, in laying out his many fantastic reasons for the GOP to not consider any Obama nominee, invoked Garland as the type of moderate judge that the Supreme Court needed. Hatch, of course, has previously called Garland a "consensus nominee."

Orrin Hatch liked Garland guys, so the entire GOP should've gone the way of one senator from Utah.

This logic is ridiculous, and I'll be sure to use it whenever a blue dog like Joe Manchin supports something and mainstream democrats cry bullshit.

Furthermore, the idea that Garland was a consensus nominee and should've been rubber stamped given his stated position on the Heller decision and overall interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is laughable. Yeah. A majority republican senate is going to confirm the swing vote to change how this country views individual gun ownership.

I notice you failed to leave that part of the equation likely because it's extremely damaging to your argument.

Quote
The problem with the parties in power operating from their position, as you so eloquently put it, is that when their position only exists in opposition to the other political party, they have clear incentives to increase their own influence and power by being antagonistic instead of solving problems. That destructive impulse, while it consolidates their rhetoric power within their base, leads to less faith in politicians from the majority of citizens, which leads to further divisive party politics, which leads to elections won by the most divisive and inflammatory candidates.

Clearly you're operating from the premise that Obama was some unifying force, and wasn't divisive. K.

Quote
If parties operating from their position meant a good-faith effort to improve the opportunities given to all citizens, despite contrasting ideas of how those improvements would manifest, there would be no problem. But when parties operating from their position means doing whatever you can to strengthen the echo-chamber of your base and out-rhetoric your opponents, that is a massive problem.
Both Democrats and Republicans do this, of course. But the difference is that Republicans in power tend to play towards their rhetorical base, whereas Obama tripped over himself (and lost the enthusiastic support of many potential left-wing voters for his entire party) trying to play the role of a left-leaning, pro-free-market, across-the-aisle centrist.

Obama is a centrist only to those who want to move the goalposts of what centrism mean. As for the rest of this dreck, the idea that Democrats in power don't play to the worst parts of their base with inflammatory rhetoric is laughable. "NEVERTHELESS SHE PERSISTED!" "STOLEN SEAT" and the entire Russian narrative being prime examples. Nevermind the rigid insistence on playing identity politics which is the leading cause as to why this nation is as fractured as it is socially.

Quote
Again, I'm happy to say that I am ideologically significantly left of the Democratic party.
Remember what I said about Obama being a centrist only to those who want to move the goalposts as to what that means?

Quote
Furthermore, your rephrasing of Barbara Underwood's double jeopardy statement/the NY AG's general position regarding double jeopardy as it applies to presidential pardons is exactly the type of word-twisting and deciding to not see the nuance that enables the brazen partisanship that we see in politics. She very clearly didn't call the entire concept of double jeopardy a loophole, but was, in a manner consistent with the position of the NY AG office, expressing a desire to eliminate a specific circumstance which has previously been considered to be part of double jeopardy in NY.

Here is her statement: President Trump’s latest pardon makes crystal clear his willingness to use his pardon power to thwart the cause of justice, rather than advance it. By pardoning Dinesh D’Souza, President Trump is undermining the rule of law by pardoning a political supporter who is an unapologetic convicted felon.

First it was Sheriff Joe Arpaio.

Then it was Scooter Libby.

Now it’s Dinesh D’Souza.

We can’t afford to wait to see who will be next. Lawmakers must act now to close New York’s double jeopardy loophole and ensure that anyone who evades federal justice by virtue of a politically expedient pardon can be held accountable if they violate New York law.

Quote
Schneiderman wrote, of course "New York’s statutory protections could result in the unintended and unjust consequence of insulating someone pardoned for serious federal crimes from subsequent prosecution for state crimes—even if that person was never tried or convicted in federal court, and never served a single day in federal prison." This isn't an indictment of double jeopardy conceptually, nor did it call the entirety of double jeopardy a loophole, but that there are specific unintended consequences to the current laws that include states losing power to the executive branch of the federal government via the executive pardon.

But of course, the NY AG office is getting rid of all of double jeopardy, according to some pundit you decided to listen to.

No actually, I formulated my opinion after seeing the initial statement, and Schneiderman's statement does nothing to dispel the idea that this is an attack both on the 5th amendment and the Presidents plenary power to pardon. This idea that people who were given a federal pardon should be charged for the same crime in State Court RUNS COMPLETELY COUNTER TO THE CONCEPT OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY. You can mince words all you want, but the idea that you would say it isn't an indictment of double jeopardy when in the latter statement Schneiderman literally states that they're seeking to retry people in State Court for the same crime they were given a federal pardon for as I said, is a direct encroachment on both the concept of double jeopardy, and the Presidents plenary power in this regard. If you want someone else with pardon power, WIN AN ELECTION. To repeat the quote some clown once uttered, "elections have consequences."

Also, bolded for hilarity that someone "left of the democratic party" now wants to make an argument along federalistic principles. Sure though, I'm the one being hypocritical here.

Quote
Furthermore, tying the concept of double jeopardy to a "liberal" cause is yet another example of the rhetoric you used being exactly the same rhetoric so easily manipulated by politicians in power.

How is this not a liberal initiative? Or are Eric Schneiderman and his successor bastions of conservatism? When a conservative AG spews something this freaking dumb, let me know, i'll be there to criticize it.

Quote
I criticize you for being overtly partisan not because I don't see the partisanship of posters like Alio, but because your specific brand of toxic partisanship combined with this seemingly deep rooted desire to appear well-informed and nuanced (I can't wait to see which 'alternative/intellectual' centrist-ish political blogger you cite on a barely related tangent next) is just so deeply hypocritical and discouraging to read.

Pot, meet kettle. I criticize you for being blatantly hypocritical not because I don't see the same type of rhetoric elsewhere, but because your specific brand of hypocrisy combined with this seemingly deep rooted desire to appear as some sort of objective observer (I can't wait to see you let go the next fifteen posts on this board about how anyone right of John McCain is an idiotic, easily manipulated racist while you bitch that its MY RHETORIC thats toxic and divisive) is just so deeply hypocritical and discouraging to read.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 06, 2018, 08:37:59 PM
https://twitter.com/_cooper/status/1004198236125622272?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 06, 2018, 09:09:28 PM
Whipped

https://www.bostonglobe.com/news/politics/2018/05/31/finally-know-who-mitt-romney-voted-for-presidential-election/XskSDUqfPTrt2IfigqgbpK/story.html


At least it wasn’t a throwaway vote like Jill Stein
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 06, 2018, 09:10:45 PM
Oh wow those are some long posts
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on June 08, 2018, 12:54:01 PM
Furthermore, the idea that Garland was a consensus nominee and should've been rubber stamped given his stated position on the Heller decision and overall interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is laughable. Yeah. A majority republican senate is going to confirm the swing vote to change how this country views individual gun ownership.

I notice you failed to leave that part of the equation likely because it's extremely damaging to your argument.

I don't think Garland would've or should've been rubber stamped - but I think the Senate's decision to not consider any Obama nominee was farcical and harmful to the principles of representative politics. I bring up Sen. Hatch just as an example of the hypocrisy that partisanship drives all of us toward.

Quote
Clearly you're operating from the premise that Obama was some unifying force, and wasn't divisive. K.

I'm operating from the premise that Obama attempted to be unifying. He was very clearly unsuccessful. Speaking of which, I've been rereading Chernow's Washington recently, and you see the same dynamics awakening almost immediately upon the inception of this country. The insane amount of effort Washington put into being a unifying builder and consensus seeker, is so sad compared to how easily his nonpartisan position was painfully stripped away from him by the bickering of Jefferson and Hamilton and the ensuing political parties that awakened essentially immediately after the creation of our government. The amount of time our nation's leaders have spent simply trying to convince their electors that they are working for their nation and not a specific political party is pretty pathetic.

Quote
Obama is a centrist only to those who want to move the goalposts of what centrism mean. As for the rest of this dreck, the idea that Democrats in power don't play to the worst parts of their base with inflammatory rhetoric is laughable. "NEVERTHELESS SHE PERSISTED!" "STOLEN SEAT" and the entire Russian narrative being prime examples. Nevermind the rigid insistence on playing identity politics which is the leading cause as to why this nation is as fractured as it is socially.

Very fair criticisms of the Democratic Party's current talking points, although as usual lacking in a bit of logical continuity. Are you accusing Obama of ring-leading the Russia narrative as well as the "she-persisted" slogan wielding? Also playing to the worst parts of the Democratic base would look significantly different than those examples you offered. If you're curious, the worst part of the Democratic base is their inclinations to shut down freedom of speech.

Quote
Remember what I said about Obama being a centrist only to those who want to move the goalposts as to what that means?

Can you establish what part of Obama's specific political actions delineate his left-wing political orientation? I'll offer a quick and easy source for my general point regarding his centrism:  https://www.politicalcompass.org/uselection2012

Quote
This idea that people who were given a federal pardon should be charged for the same crime in State Court RUNS COMPLETELY COUNTER TO THE CONCEPT OF DOUBLE JEOPARDY. You can mince words all you want, but the idea that you would say it isn't an indictment of double jeopardy when in the latter statement Schneiderman literally states that they're seeking to retry people in State Court for the same crime they were given a federal pardon for as I said, is a direct encroachment on both the concept of double jeopardy, and the Presidents plenary power in this regard. If you want someone else with pardon power, WIN AN ELECTION. To repeat the quote some clown once uttered, "elections have consequences."

Also, bolded for hilarity that someone "left of the democratic party" now wants to make an argument along federalistic principles. Sure though, I'm the one being hypocritical here.

Well, I feel successful here - I got you to reframe your complaint from one that deliberately misunderstands someone's argument (eg democrats want to get rid of double jeopardy - liberals are bad and also hypocritical) to one that actually criticizes the underlying ideology of their end goal (eg democrats want to deemphasize the power of the federal government in a way that runs counter to a set of laws I apparently have strong convictions about).

Although of course, there is more than one principle that underlies this country's doctrines regarding double jeopardy - this law would push back at one such principle of the doctrine (the right to not stand trial and face a conviction for the same crime more than once). However, as I am sure you most know, any individual state and the federal government are legally considered to be dual sovereigns, and as such already are able to prosecute individuals for the same crime without violating the doctrine of Double Jeopardy, according to Federal Law and Justice Department guidelines. Individual states have their own nuance when it comes to decisions that are made in federal court and then are pursued in state courts, but the federal court itself has no overt restriction on pursuing prosecution on cases that have already concluded in state courts.

In our country, the double jeopardy doctrine already contains many multitudes, and this particular position does not run counter to the Federal Government's own position regarding dual sovereignty nor would its passage negate all instances of double jeopardy in NY state or this country. Your reaction says more about your knee-jerk reactionary impluse than it does offer a clear and concise view of what you believe double jeopardy and the power of the presidential pardon ought to stand for.

Also, your inability to differentiate my own personal beliefs from my explanation of others' beliefs is a little sad.

Quote
How is this not a liberal initiative?

If you take the time to read what I specifically wrote, you will see that I was criticizing you identifying the doctrine of double jeopardy itself as part of a liberal agenda as indicative of the sad state of hyper partisanship. You ought to take a little more time and breathe while thinking through these points.

Quote
Pot, meet kettle. I criticize you for being blatantly hypocritical not because I don't see the same type of rhetoric elsewhere, but because your specific brand of hypocrisy combined with this seemingly deep rooted desire to appear as some sort of objective observer (I can't wait to see you let go the next fifteen posts on this board about how anyone right of John McCain is an idiotic, easily manipulated racist while you bitch that its MY RHETORIC thats toxic and divisive) is just so deeply hypocritical and discouraging to read.

Oh man, you are SO CLOSE to being clever here - but the premise doesn't fit the terminology. Criticizing me for not responding adequately/ignoring toxic and divisive Democrat talking points by its very nature can't be "discouraging to read." Also, I'm fairly curious what your perception rhetoric is?

Although I do definitely concede the general point, if I had more mental energy and strength of spirit, I would tackle the talking points of those ideologically more similar to me with the same enthusiasm as I do yours. You'll have to take it for granted that the reason I don't engage in those conversations on this message board is that I am constantly having those conversations off the internet, and they are exhausting and unending.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 11, 2018, 01:41:09 PM
Cool and normal behavior

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/ohio-wins-supreme-court-fight-over-voter-registration-n873226
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 27, 2018, 07:54:58 AM
NY-14 just told centrists to freak themselves.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on June 27, 2018, 08:27:36 AM
NY-14 just told centrists to freak themselves.

?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 27, 2018, 09:03:53 AM
?
Democratic Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez unseated incumbent Dem. Joe Crowley in the Dem primary. The district is heavy blue so she's basically a lock for Congress in November.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 27, 2018, 09:20:55 AM
?
She upset a 10-term incumbent who was supposedly poised to eventually replace Nancy Pelosi
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on June 27, 2018, 09:33:49 AM
Democratic Socialist Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez unseated incumbent Dem. Joe Crowley in the Dem primary. The district is heavy blue so she's basically a lock for Congress in November.

smh

(https://i.imgur.com/OplTcDtl.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 27, 2018, 09:39:52 AM
I think it's not a bad thing to have some variety in Congress regarding viewpoints that are a little more on the extreme end.  I can't say I agree with a good chunk of her platform, especially wanting to abolish ICE.  I can see wanting to modify it's role from what it is now some, but ICE has a vital function in this country.

While I certainly want people to have a livable wage, affordable health care, housing, food and a good life in general, no one ever addresses how it gets paid for.  In simple terms, you either have to bring in more taxes, spend less in government, or grow the GDP.  Probably not just one of those.  I'm totally fine with paying more in taxes if it actually goes to help the situation and isn't being wasted. I'm fine with cutting wastage in government or redundant expenditures as long as we aren't cutting programs that are truly needed by people that aren't able to help themselves. 

One side wants to cut taxes, cut government spending and turn a blind eye to the people below the middle class.  While it pisses me off that there are people out there gaming the system by being useless on purpose and getting welfare, you can't throw away everything because of these people, especially the ones that have children that don't have a choice in the matter.

The other side wants to give everyone affordable or free insurance, education, housing, etc., which is wonderful but they aren't honest and upfront about what happens when the bill comes due for it (big tax increases or further increases to national debt, or both).

Neither side is honest about the down side of their ideas.  To be honest, there is no perfect answer.  Someone will get shafted no matter what happens.  I hate to see lazy people that choose not to work getting by just as well or better on the government teat than people who work 40 hrs a week trying to provide for themselves.  I hate even more seeing children and disabled people suffering and struggling in a country that should be doing more. 

I think other countries do some things in a much better way than the United States, but I also think the opposite is true, otherwise we wouldn't have gotten where we are today.  I know this is rambling, but I really wish things weren't so polarized.   

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 27, 2018, 11:26:08 AM
I think it's not a bad thing to have some variety in Congress regarding viewpoints that are a little more on the extreme end.  I can't say I agree with a good chunk of her platform, especially wanting to abolish ICE.  I can see wanting to modify it's role from what it is now some, but ICE has a vital function in this country.

While I certainly want people to have a livable wage, affordable health care, housing, food and a good life in general, no one ever addresses how it gets paid for.  In simple terms, you either have to bring in more taxes, spend less in government, or grow the GDP.  Probably not just one of those.  I'm totally fine with paying more in taxes if it actually goes to help the situation and isn't being wasted. I'm fine with cutting wastage in government or redundant expenditures as long as we aren't cutting programs that are truly needed by people that aren't able to help themselves. 

One side wants to cut taxes, cut government spending and turn a blind eye to the people below the middle class.  While it pisses me off that there are people out there gaming the system by being useless on purpose and getting welfare, you can't throw away everything because of these people, especially the ones that have children that don't have a choice in the matter.

The other side wants to give everyone affordable or free insurance, education, housing, etc., which is wonderful but they aren't honest and upfront about what happens when the bill comes due for it (big tax increases or further increases to national debt, or both).

Neither side is honest about the down side of their ideas.  To be honest, there is no perfect answer.  Someone will get shafted no matter what happens.  I hate to see lazy people that choose not to work getting by just as well or better on the government teat than people who work 40 hrs a week trying to provide for themselves.  I hate even more seeing children and disabled people suffering and struggling in a country that should be doing more. 

I think other countries do some things in a much better way than the United States, but I also think the opposite is true, otherwise we wouldn't have gotten where we are today.  I know this is rambling, but I really wish things weren't so polarized.   



^Alt right fracist alert
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 27, 2018, 11:53:34 AM
For me, the problem with the whole "Do you want to pay more taxes to fund all your socialist programs" comes down to "Why do you and I have to pay more taxes?"

Why does Jeff Bezos get to sit on $144 billion dollars? Why does Apple get to have $158 billion in cash offshore?

Trump and his cronies gave a tax break to people like Bezos and to companies like Apple. And what are they doing with it? Bezos is building the world's largest underground clock. Apple is buying back its stock. None of their employees are getting anything from it.

Yeah, yeah. I'm a "socialist" who just wants to redistribute wealth like a communist. It's funny how redistributing money up didn't outrage anyone on the right.

If trickle-down economics was at all a realistic thing, I'd be all for it. I'm not a communist-minded person. I, like conservatives, want to keep more of my own money. But I'm not, and it's at the expense of making a guy like Bezos a couple extra million this year.

No human being is worth a billion dollars unless every human being is worth a billion dollars. Call me whatever names you want, I'm never going to waver from that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 27, 2018, 11:57:57 AM
Heh, I just did a little exercise.

Jeff Bezos is worth $158 billion. There are 7.5 billion people on the planet.

If Bezos gave every single person $21 each, that would be $157.5 billion.

He'd still have half a billion dollars left all to himself.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 27, 2018, 12:18:54 PM
How much more money are you cool with paying in taxes, %-wise?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 27, 2018, 12:20:20 PM
Need someone to run on an “Abolish IRS!” Platform tbh.

Taxation is Theft!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on June 27, 2018, 12:36:14 PM
Heh, I just did a little exercise.

Jeff Bezos is worth $158 billion. There are 7.5 billion people on the planet.

If Bezos gave every single person $21 each, that would be $157.5 billion.

He'd still have half a billion dollars left all to himself.

How much of Bezos' net worth is liquid? It's significantly lower. And if he tried to sell off the stock that most of his worth is tied up in it would go significantly down in value too. excrement ain't that simple.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 27, 2018, 01:23:19 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/27/politics/anthony-kennedy-retires/index.html

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 27, 2018, 02:04:38 PM
How much more money are you cool with paying in taxes, %-wise?

Is that a question for me? Because I'm cool with paying about negative 10% more.
I don't agree with the idea that there should be a flat tax, or that people who make above certain thresholds shouldn't be responsible for a higher percentage of their income.

If person A makes $30k/year, and person B makes $300k/year, and both pay 10% of their income in taxes, person A has to live on $27k, but person B is going to live on $270k.  One of those people is going to have a far nicer Christmas than the other.

Need someone to run on an “Abolish IRS!” Platform tbh.

Taxation is Theft!

Nobody wants to pay taxes. But nobody wants to drive on unpaved roads, with no street lights either. No one is particularly keen on living without police or firefighters to keep them safe.

Like them or not, taxes are a necessary evil. Unless you actually believe the private sector would fill those roles in a manner that would be beneficial to the public.

How much of Bezos' net worth is liquid? It's significantly lower. And if he tried to sell off the stock that most of his worth is tied up in it would go significantly down in value too. excrement ain't that simple.

So I shouldn't have demanded Jeff Bezos hand every human on the planet $21?

Come on. Of course, his worth isn't liquid. And I'm sure all of us are well aware of that fact. This tactic is overused whenever the discussion of taxation is breached. It's always "You can't say Apple should pay taxes on $158B because not all of it was made in the US!" or "You can't say Jeff Bezos has to pay taxes on $158B because it's not all this year's income."

Yeah, we all know this. The point really boils down to: why isn't the top paying a "fair share?" Not equal, but fair. As in the example above, two people on opposite ends of the income spectrum shouldn't be expected to contribute an "equal share", but both are responsible for their own "fair share."
Instead, the billionaires and megacorps got a tax break this year, and Congress is trying to pay for it with people's Social Security. All under the laughable guise of "trickle-down economics" and in the face of all of them saying they wouldn't share anything if they got it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on June 27, 2018, 03:17:34 PM
So I shouldn't have demanded Jeff Bezos hand every human on the planet $21?

Come on. Of course, his worth isn't liquid. And I'm sure all of us are well aware of that fact. This tactic is overused whenever the discussion of taxation is breached. It's always "You can't say Apple should pay taxes on $158B because not all of it was made in the US!" or "You can't say Jeff Bezos has to pay taxes on $158B because it's not all this year's income."

Yeah, we all know this. The point really boils down to: why isn't the top paying a "fair share?" Not equal, but fair. As in the example above, two people on opposite ends of the income spectrum shouldn't be expected to contribute an "equal share", but both are responsible for their own "fair share."
Instead, the billionaires and megacorps got a tax break this year, and Congress is trying to pay for it with people's Social Security. All under the laughable guise of "trickle-down economics" and in the face of all of them saying they wouldn't share anything if they got it.


And what exactly defines a "fair share"? At what level of tax would you be satisfied that whomever has paid their fair share?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 27, 2018, 03:31:47 PM
And what exactly defines a "fair share"? At what level of tax would you be satisfied that whomever has paid their fair share?

Well, that's a whole different discussion isn't it? And it's not one you can have on a simple internet message board, Facebook, Twitter, etc.

Here is where it becomes a matter of political opinion, and where the conversation takes it biggest divergence, but I don't believe it's at all reasonable for any person to have immense wealth--let's just say one billion dollars for sake of the argument--while there are people living below the poverty line.

Yes, I would forcibly redistribute that wealth via taxation and redistribution. I wouldn't make both groups "equal" in wealth, the billionaire could still be fantastically rich, but there's no reason for someone to have to go hungry to make sure their kids eat while a guy builds an underground clock because he has nothing else to do with his money.

But let's not either of us pretend that this is a simple matter that can be solved here. But it's reasonable to believe that the problem of extreme poverty could be solved. I think we could reasonably assume a group could be formed to determine what the tax scale should be from the poorest American to the richest, where the rich remain rich, and the destitute live above the poverty line.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 27, 2018, 03:34:39 PM
And what exactly defines a "fair share"? At what level of tax would you be satisfied that whomever has paid their fair share?

Just FTR, I'm "okay" with what I personally pay in taxes. Obviously, I'd love to pay less, who wouldn't, but I'm okay with paying what I do, under the assumption that the money goes to things like education, police and fire departments, and safe roads. Again, I believe taxes to be a necessary evil for a civilized society.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 27, 2018, 03:45:45 PM
The essential problem is the failure to understand that global wealth is a finite resource. As such, when a greater amount is held by the small number of people at the top, by definition it has to be taken from those elsewhere. Greater poverty is the essential, inevitable and unavoidable consequence of the harbouring of wealth.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 27, 2018, 03:53:40 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/27/politics/anthony-kennedy-retires/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2018/06/27/politics/anthony-kennedy-retires/index.html)

(https://i.imgur.com/sl96jyj.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on June 27, 2018, 04:43:17 PM
The essential problem is the failure to understand that global wealth is a finite resource. As such, when a greater amount is held by the small number of people at the top, by definition it has to be taken from those elsewhere. Greater poverty is the essential, inevitable and unavoidable consequence of the harbouring of wealth.

Hence, the need to forcibly redistribute said wealth.

I don't think everyone is entitled to an equal share of the pie. Some people truly work harder than others (ignoring the realities of social influences on success), so they earn a better share of the whole.

I just don't think anyone or any group consisting of 1% of the population earns a 90% share of the whole.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 27, 2018, 06:32:13 PM
Hence, the need to forcibly redistribute said wealth.


How about instead of appealing to muh guvment to rob people you just do it yourself?

Also, sad to see Kennedy retire. The very definition of a judicial moderate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on June 28, 2018, 01:34:29 PM
How about instead of appealing to muh guvment to rob people you just do it yourself? 

Wait, are you a 'taxation is theft' ancap devotee?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 28, 2018, 02:52:27 PM
Wait, are you a 'taxation is theft' ancap devotee?

Absolutely not, but “forced wealth redistribution” is a nice way of saying, “let’s fuckin rob people for the high crime of being successful.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 03, 2018, 08:45:20 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/post-politics/wp/2017/01/23/progressives-launch-justice-democrats-to-counter-primary-corporate-legislators/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.23123964345a&__twitter_impression=true

RIP Libs
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 05, 2018, 01:57:53 PM
smh

(https://i.imgur.com/OplTcDtl.png)
Actually she's right.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 05, 2018, 02:00:31 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/amphtml/news/post-politics/wp/2017/01/23/progressives-launch-justice-democrats-to-counter-primary-corporate-legislators/?noredirect=on&utm_term=.23123964345a&__twitter_impression=true

RIP Libs
Article is a year and a half old but JD has done a good job backing Dems who arent completely worthless.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 09, 2018, 11:23:49 AM
Quote
RIP Libs

https://nypost.com/2018/07/07/is-hillary-clinton-secretly-planning-to-run-in-2020/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 09, 2018, 11:45:51 AM
https://nypost.com/2018/07/07/is-hillary-clinton-secretly-planning-to-run-in-2020/

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betteridge%27s_law_of_headlines
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 12, 2018, 10:01:02 AM
https://mobile.twitter.com/ocasio2018/status/1017394155268575232
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 12, 2018, 08:44:19 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/ocasio2018/status/1017394155268575232

freak this guy.

Edit: Crowley says he's not running and can't remove his name from the ballot. So... freak this guy anyway.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 23, 2018, 12:35:17 PM
Moved
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 28, 2018, 10:08:13 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/dailycaller/status/1022852142682570752

1) tax
2) profit
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 28, 2018, 10:12:13 PM
Quote
During a recent, wide-ranging interview with “The Daily Show” host Trevor Noah, Ocasio-Cortez said she is unlike any politician — and one that will not waver once inside the halls of Congress — because she found victory in a major primary without the support of major Wall Street corporations and private equity firms.

“I think that what makes our campaign and my candidacy a little different is that I have taken a public pledge not to accept any corporate PAC money whatsoever,” Ocasio-Cortez said to applause.

“I actually think I may be one of the only ones that actually got elected for the first time on that,” she added. “Many folks got elected with some corporate money and then they swore it off after. But I think I’m one of the first to get elected right out of the gate without any corporate PAC money, which gives me a very large degree of independence.”

Later in the interview, Ocasio-Cortez said “it comes back to money in politics” and who is “financing your campaign.” She denounced private equity firms who finance political campaigns alleging it’s “no coincidence they profit off of low wages.”

But what’s the truth?

According to campaign finance documents, Ocasio-Cortez raised $861,698.54 during her successful bid to unseat Rep. Joe Crowley (D-N.Y.) for New York’s 14th congressional district.

However, there’s just one glaring problem that doesn’t align with what Ocasio-Cortez told Noah.

The disclosures show that Ocasio-Cortez received $3,399 JP Morgan Chase, a major Wall Street corporate bank, and $2,700 from Elevation Partners, a New York-based private equity firm with nearly $2 billion in assets.

While the JP Morgan Chase donations came from two company employees, the Elevation Parters’ donation came via Roger McNamee, a founding parter at the firm.

lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 30, 2018, 08:05:24 PM
Quote
Proponents of single-payer healthcare in the United States point out that the idea isn’t new here: President Harry Truman briefly made a compulsory national health program a plank of his Fair Deal, before withdrawing it amid robust bipartisan opposition.

But there’s another, even more important sense in which “Medicare for All” isn’t new: several states have tried to go down that path. All of them stopped once the full cost and necessary tax hikes became clear.

According to new analysis from the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, the “Medicare for All” plan championed by Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., would increase government healthcare spending by $32.6 trillion over ten years. Even doubling current individual and corporate income tax revenues would prove insufficient to fund such a program.

Several states ran into similar problems. With growing interest at the federal level, the pitfalls states encountered are now especially instructive.

Sanders, one of the most vocal supporters of single-payer healthcare on Capitol Hill, had a front-row seat for the demise of a similar plan in one of the wealthiest and most progressive states in the nation. In 2011, Vermont came closer to implementing a single-payer system than any other state. The legislature passed the bill. Gov. Peter Shumlin, D-Vt., who had campaigned on the idea, happily signed Green Mountain Care into law.

Then the invoice arrived.

Vermont made the mistake of adopting an extraordinarily costly overhaul of the entire healthcare system without waiting for a fiscal estimate or establishing exactly how the state would pay for it. When the estimates came in, they were stratospheric. In a wealthy state with the second-lowest uninsured rate in the country (3.7 percent, compared to a national average of 8.8 percent), the state’s own estimates concluded that single-payer would require a near-doubling of the state’s budget.

Vermont hoped to use federal funding for half of this cost, but to cover its share, taxes would have to go up — a lot. Payroll taxes would have had to rise by 11.5 percentage points. Individual income tax rates could go up by as much as 9 percentage points. Shumlin scrapped the plan, concluding that it would be “unwise and untenable.”

Voters in Colorado arrived at much the same conclusion when single-payer healthcare went on the ballot in 2016. The price tag (which was arguably low-balled) was enough to tax income at rates as high as 14.63 percent, more than triple the state’s current flat income tax rate.

The electorate balked at the costs. They may have been concerned about the details, too, as it vested authority to adjust benefits and even change tax rates with a board of largely unaccountable trustees. No one operates under the illusion that private insurance is a panacea in this regard, but at least people have options and avenues of appeal. Single-payer strips that away; the government provides what it chooses to provide. In Colorado, that proved a potent concern.

On Election Day, the constitutional amendment establishing ColoradoCare met a crushing defeat, rejected by an astonishing 79 percent of voters.

Finally, consider the case of California, a state with a Democratic governor, Democratic supermajorities in both legislative chambers, and an electorate predisposed to embrace the “Medicare for All” concept. In 2017, single-payer legislation dubbed Healthy California passed the Senate, but was then pulled by House leadership, with the speaker expressing concern that the proposal was too expensive, lacked appropriate funding mechanisms, and wasn’t ready for prime time.

He was right about how expensive it was. The state’s estimates pegged the cost at $400 billion per year, twice the state’s budget. An outside report commissioned by an advocacy group rejected the estimates of the nonpartisan legislative office, concluding that the plan would cost a mere $331 billion.

California’s current budget is $201 billion.

If states are the laboratories of democracy, single-payer still hasn’t made it out of the test tube. And these states had an advantage that the federal government doesn’t, as they believed they could offload about half of their costs on the federal government. At the federal level, there’s nowhere to go — except to the taxpayers.

If wealthy, progressive states like Vermont and California found the costs intolerable, and if voters in the swing state of Colorado defeated universal health care by a 4-to-1 vote, their experiences do not bode well for a national program. Sooner or later, the enticing language of “Medicare for All” runs up against some very real and very daunting costs.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 31, 2018, 08:08:04 AM
^^^ thx for the informative read.

Below a NYT pro Single-Payer piece:

"Why Single-Payer Health Care Saves Money"

The total cost of providing health coverage under the single-payer approach is actually substantially lower than under the current system in the United States.
By Robert H. Frank
July 7, 2017

Lingering uncertainty about the fate of the Affordable Care Act has spurred the California legislature to consider adoption of a statewide single-payer health care system.

Sometimes described as Medicare for all, single-payer is a system in which a public agency handles health care financing while the delivery of care remains largely in private hands.

Discussions of the California measure have stalled, however, in the wake of preliminary estimates pegging the cost of the program as greater than the entire state government budget. Similar cost concerns derailed single-payer proposals in Colorado and Vermont.

Voters need to understand that this cost objection is specious. That’s because, as experience in many countries has demonstrated, the total cost of providing health coverage under the single-payer approach is actually substantially lower than under the current system in the United States. It is a bedrock economic principle that if we can find a way to do something more efficiently, it’s possible for everyone to come out ahead.

By analogy, suppose that your state’s government took over road maintenance from the county governments within it, in the process reducing total maintenance costs by 30 percent. Your state taxes would obviously have to go up under this arrangement.

But if roads would be as well maintained as before, would that be a reason to oppose the move? Clearly not, since the resulting cost savings would reduce your county taxes by more than your state taxes went up. Likewise, it makes no sense to oppose single-payer on the grounds that it would require additional tax revenue. In each case, the resulting gains in efficiency would leave you with greater effective purchasing power than before.

Total costs are lower under single-payer systems for several reasons. One is that administrative costs average only about 2 percent of total expenses under a single-payer program like Medicare, less than one-sixth the corresponding percentage for many private insurers. Single-payer systems also spend virtually nothing on competitive advertising, which can account for more than 15 percent of total expenses for private insurers.

The most important source of cost savings under single-payer is that large government entities are able to negotiate much more favorable terms with service providers. In 2012, for example, the average cost of coronary bypass surgery was more than $73,000 in the United States but less than $23,000 in France.

Despite this evidence, respected commentators continue to cite costs as a reason to doubt that single-payer can succeed in the United States. A recent Washington Post editorial, for example, ominously predicted that budget realities would dampen enthusiasm for single-payer, noting that the per capita expenditures under existing single-payer programs in the United States were much higher than those in other countries.

But this comparison is misleading. In most other countries, single-payer covers the whole population, most of which has only minimal health needs. In contrast, single-payer components of the United States system disproportionately cover population subgroups with the heaviest medical needs: older people (Medicare), the poor and disabled (Medicaid) and returned service personnel (Department of Veterans Affairs).

In short, the evidence is clear that single-payer delivers quality care at significantly lower cost than the current American hybrid system. It thus makes no sense to reject single-payer on the grounds that it would require higher tax revenues. That’s true, of course, but it’s an irrelevant objection.

In addition to being far cheaper, single-payer would also defuse the powerful political objections to the Affordable Care Act’s participation mandate. Polls consistently show that large majorities want people with pre-existing conditions to be able to obtain health coverage at affordable rates. But that goal cannot be achieved unless healthy people are required to join the insured pool. Officials in the Obama administration tried, largely in vain, to explain why the program’s insurance exchanges would collapse in the absence of the participation mandate.

But the logic of the underlying argument is actually very simple. Most people seem able to grasp it if you ask them what would happen if the government required companies to sell fire insurance at affordable rates to people whose houses had already burned down.

No home insurer could remain in business if each policy it sold required it to replace a house costing several hundred thousand dollars. Similarly, no health insurer could remain in business if each of its policy holders generated many thousands of dollars in health care reimbursements each month.

That’s why the lack of a mandate in the alternative plans under consideration means that millions of people with pre-existing conditions will become uninsurable if repeal efforts are successful. An underappreciated advantage of the single-payer approach is that it sidesteps the mandate objection by paying to cover everyone out of tax revenue.

Of course, having to pay taxes is itself a mandate of a sort, but it’s one the electorate has largely come to terms with. Apart from fringe groups that denounce all taxation as theft, most people understand that our entire system would collapse if tax payments were purely voluntary.

The Affordable Care Act is an inefficient system that was adopted only because its architects believed, plausibly, that the more efficient single-payer approach would not be politically achievable in 2009. But single-payer now enjoys significantly higher support than it did then, and is actually strongly favored by voters in some states.

Solid majorities nationwide now favor expansion of the existing single-payer elements of our current system, such as Medicare and Medicaid. Medicaid cuts proposed in Congress have been roundly criticized. Perhaps it’s time to go further: Individual states and, eventually, the entire country, can save money and improve services by embracing single-payer health care.

Robert H. Frank is an economics professor at the Johnson Graduate School of Management at Cornell University. Follow him on Twitter at @econnaturalist.
[/size][/size]
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 31, 2018, 08:22:05 AM


https://slate.com/business/2018/07/single-payer-health-care-could-save-americans-usd2-trillion-conservative-think-tanker-accidentally-argues.html

Quote
Blahous seems to have set out to show that, even if you assume switching to a single-payer system will lead to major cost savings on medical care and administrative expenses, it will still require a massive increase in federal spending. He calculates that if Sanders’ bill delivered on all of its promises, it would increase federal spending on health care by $32.6 trillion between 2022 and 2031—which is, of course, quite a bit of money, and the number that conservatives are choosing to focus on. But as economist Ernie Tedeschi noted on Twitter this morning, Blahous’ report also shows that total U.S. health care spending would fall by about $2.05 trillion during that time period, even as all Americans would finally have insurance, because the plan would reduce payments to doctors and hospitals to Medicare rates (which are lower than what private insurance pays) while saving on prescription drug costs and administrative expenses.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on July 31, 2018, 11:44:07 AM
Reducing the cost of prescription drugs alone would completely change the cost of healthcare in this country.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 03, 2018, 12:00:24 PM
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/nra-financial-trouble-706371/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 03, 2018, 12:11:29 PM
https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/nra-financial-trouble-706371/

Cuomo does things I don't like, but this ain't one of them. He's a loud opponent of the NRA.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 08, 2018, 10:07:59 AM
Oops.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/new-york-rep-chris-collins-arrested-insider-trading-charges-n898661
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 08, 2018, 11:48:41 AM
https://twitter.com/alyssa_milano/status/1027025774552014848

Lolllllk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 08, 2018, 12:05:17 PM
https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2018/08/08/democratic-socialism-sanders-ocasio-cortez-2018-primary-results-219161
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 09, 2018, 11:56:49 AM
Quote
Congressional candidate Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez struggled with a question about House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi Wednesday night, initially stating that there isn’t “any one head” of the Democratic Party.

In an interview on CNN’s “Cuomo Primetime,” anchor Chris Cuomo asked the 28-year-old New Yorker who she believed to be the “head of the Democratic Party.”

“Well, I don’t think that there’s any one head,” Ms. Ocasio-Cortez, a democratic socialist, replied after giving the question some thought. “We are a collective, this is a movement, and I don’t think parties are ever about one person, but they’re about the contributions that each one person gives to the party.”

Mr. Cuomo accused Ms. Ocasio-Cortez of being “intentionally” vague.

“If you are to be successful in the general,” Mr. Cuomo pressed, “there will be a leader of your caucus. Her name is Nancy Pelosi. Do you recognize her as the leader for the House Democrats?”

“Of course,” Ms. Ocasio-Cortez answered tersely. “I think absolutely, right now, she is the leader. Hopefully, you know, we’ll see — she’s the current leader of the party and I think that the party absolutely does have its leadership in the House. We have our leadership in the Senate as well.”

Asked if she would support Mrs. Pelosi as leader, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez responded, “We don’t want to get ahead of ourselves, as you mentioned, I’ve got to win my race first. But we’ve got to take a look at what’s going on. We’ve got to take a look at winning the House back in November, and then once the House is won, we have to make that decision from there. You know, I think, it’s not about a referendum on any one person, but it needs to be a referendum on where we are at as a team, as a collective, as people who are interested in advancing the economic and social issues in America.”

Mr. Cuomo pointed out that some Democrats have been reluctant to back Mrs. Pelosi as leader ahead of the midterm elections amid warring factions in the party between moderate and far-left Democrats.

Ms. Ocasio-Cortez said the focus on who backs Mrs. Pelosi and who doesn’t has become a deliberate distraction.

“You know, I think it is like that red herring, where the more time we spend debating any one individual person or figure is less time that we spend talking about Medicare for all, tuition-free public college and a great new deal,” she said. “I think that what we really need to do is have discipline on winning back the House. We need to spend a lot more time talking about the issues that Americans care about.”


RIP Dems
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 09, 2018, 12:13:27 PM
Who cares? We now have a Space Force!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 09, 2018, 12:45:16 PM
Who cares? We now have a Space Force!

I still haven’t heard back on my application. Hours of First hand experience with laser pistols in COD: Advanced Warfare
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 09, 2018, 12:52:35 PM
I still haven’t heard back on my application. Hours of First hand experience with laser pistols in COD: Advanced Warfare

It was a strong resume, but unfortunately preference went to those with practical experience and Alio's years of chasing 14 year olds round darkened laser tag warehouses was felt to be more appropriate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 09, 2018, 12:55:33 PM
It was a strong resume, but unfortunately preference went to those with practical experience and Alio's years of chasing 14 year olds round darkened laser tag warehouses was felt to be more appropriate.

I tried to tell my wife it wasn't a childish waste of time. Who's laughing now?!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 09, 2018, 01:18:12 PM
I tried to tell my wife it wasn't a childish waste of time. Who's laughing now?!

(https://gaycities-featured-images-production.s3.amazonaws.com/events/originals/fb_11206955_10153178797248325_5665342660658513000_n.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 09, 2018, 01:52:06 PM
Let’s all pretend to believe that Bo googled that pic and not something he had saved to his phone
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 09, 2018, 02:16:04 PM
PEW PEW PEW PEW

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20180806/d69e4065013520d0faaf35e38cd34b49.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 09, 2018, 03:03:27 PM
Let’s all pretend to believe that Bo googled that pic and not something he had saved to his phone

My work internet search history is quite sketchy thanks to you assholes. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 09, 2018, 11:02:58 PM
^^lollllll
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 17, 2018, 02:32:13 PM
The panic surrounding AOC is hilarious, I guess the biggest pieces of excrement are afraid people's lives might actually be improved.

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 17, 2018, 02:35:07 PM
The panic surrounding AOC is hilarious, I guess the biggest pieces of excrement are afraid people's lives might actually be improved.

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk



AOC?

EDIT: Nevermind, I got it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 17, 2018, 08:49:56 PM
The panic surrounding AOC is hilarious, I guess the biggest pieces of excrement are afraid people's lives might actually be improved.

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk



Even the pieces of excrement in the democratic party?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 17, 2018, 08:54:48 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/danteatkins/status/1027237895164358657
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 25, 2018, 11:42:44 PM
https://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/dnc-approves-historic-reforms-strips-superdelegates-power_us_5b8165d0e4b034858600dcff
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 26, 2018, 08:13:06 PM
Even the pieces of excrement in the democratic party?
Especially them.

Have you ever known me to defend a Democrat simply because they're a Dem? I registered in the party to vote in primaries, not to be a cheerleader.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 27, 2018, 10:24:42 AM
https://mobile.twitter.com/clistonbrown/status/1033762678748065792
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 27, 2018, 10:26:38 AM
Especially them.

Have you ever known me to defend a Democrat simply because they're a Dem? I registered in the party to vote in primaries, not to be a cheerleader.

Fair point, and no I have not. Wasn’t implying you did, even though my comment was in response to you. Wish everyone thought that way, from both sides of the aisle. I know I’m a broken record but my biggest issue with US politics is when people blindly vote/support along party lines.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on August 27, 2018, 12:17:34 PM
Fair point, and no I have not. Wasn’t implying you did, even though my comment was in response to you. Wish everyone thought that way, from both sides of the aisle. I know I’m a broken record but my biggest issue with US politics is when people blindly vote/support along party lines.

This is the dumbest and most absurd thing. It really speaks to the assholes we are forced to elect.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 27, 2018, 01:05:22 PM
coughbobmenendezcough

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 02, 2018, 10:58:13 PM
Source is lol but it links directly to the video

https://mobile.twitter.com/realitywives/status/1035338437203771392

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/ny-news-minnesota-house-racial-slur-20180830-story.html?outputType=amp&__twitter_impression=true
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on September 02, 2018, 11:01:36 PM
Fuckin lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 03, 2018, 07:22:54 AM
He's just trying to be famous. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on September 03, 2018, 11:03:44 AM
was it an R or A?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 03, 2018, 11:12:33 AM
was it an R or A?
R.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 03, 2018, 06:20:29 PM
#Ironstache

https://twitter.com/IronStache/status/1036307779097710593?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 03, 2018, 06:27:42 PM
https://twitter.com/DenpaCodec/status/1036234981276676096?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 04, 2018, 12:57:56 PM
Stupidest thing I've seen in at least 6 or 7 minutes.

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DmP9dNxXoAMJaAS.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on September 04, 2018, 08:59:37 PM
Where Were You on the Day After the Ariana Grande Groping?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 06, 2018, 12:35:06 PM
Booker did something. Everyone will react predictably.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 13, 2018, 09:53:38 PM
No big surprises in the NY primaries but the state senate should improve a bit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 17, 2018, 07:38:14 PM
The replies are on point.
 https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/1041774778439352320?s=09

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 22, 2018, 11:21:43 AM
Ted Cruz actively trying to lose his senate seat by showing how much better his opponent is.

https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1043278255740973058?s=09
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 26, 2018, 07:07:37 PM
lolMaine

https://www.bbc.com/news/amp/world-us-canada-37204837?__twitter_impression=true

Quote
At a State House press conference , Mr LePage said he was "enormously angry" at being called a racist, and restated his earlier remarks which cast Maine's drug problem in racial terms.

He said: "When you go to war, if you know the enemy and the enemy dresses in red and you dress in blue, then you shoot at red."

He added: "You shoot at the enemy. You try to identify the enemy and the enemy right now, the overwhelming majority of people coming in, are people of colour or people of Hispanic origin."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 26, 2018, 07:09:11 PM
You know that's from two years ago, right? Not that he's not a racist queynte, but excrement's kinda long since overtaken him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 26, 2018, 07:39:57 PM
You know that's from two years ago, right? Not that he's not a racist queynte, but excrement's kinda long since overtaken him.
For some reason it was making the rounds again today.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 26, 2018, 07:41:45 PM
For some reason it was making the rounds again today.

Gubernatorial election coming up? He's term limited though, Maine's got a funky new electoral system that he was bitching about a little while ago. He was saying he wouldn't ratify the decision under the new system and the electoral officer said "suit yourself, we'll do it without you" or words to that effect.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on September 26, 2018, 09:02:48 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obZ7_c4BrDc (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=obZ7_c4BrDc)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on September 27, 2018, 09:53:13 AM
Gubernatorial election coming up? He's term limited though, Maine's got a funky new electoral system that he was bitching about a little while ago. He was saying he wouldn't ratify the decision under the new system and the electoral officer said "suit yourself, we'll do it without you" or words to that effect.

Sadly the new election system won't be utilized for the governor's seat - it requires a state constitutional amendment to be used for state general elections. So our Senators will be elected using RCV, our gubernatorial primaries were held using RCV, but our governor will be a regular election.

That being said, LePage should have never have made it to the Governor's seat in the first place, he won his first election with 38% of the vote - progressive independent Eliot Cutler had 36% and the Democratic candidate had 19%.

2014 was a nightmare election in Maine, as out-of-state animal rights activists started a bear-hunting referendum that only succeeded in turning out the rural vote who are terrified of out-of-staters telling them how to hunt, and LePage managed to hold onto his seat.

That being said, the quote regarding people of color being "enemies" is just par for the course for LePage:

Regarding undocumented immigrants: "I have been trying to get the President to pay attention to illegals in our country ... because there is a spike in hepatitis C, tuberculosis, HIV, and it is going on deaf ears."

Regarding the IRS: "What I am trying to say is the Holocaust was a horrific crime against humanity and, frankly, I would never want to see that repeated. Maybe the IRS is not quite as bad, yet."

Regarding black guys impregnating white Mainers: “These are guys with the name D-Money, Smoothie, Shifty – these types of guys – they come from Connecticut and New York, they come up here, they sell their heroin, they go back home. Incidentally, half the time they impregnate a young white girl before they leave, which is a real sad thing because then we have another issue we have to deal with down the road.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 05, 2018, 11:21:23 PM
When you're absolutely terrible at your jobs:(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181006/af2d4c1b87fc9c061226cafcc1bf1e0e.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181006/b3b0b5cb198af1201e7f4e5258c89131.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181006/592810c745719bb67f72588d3f43cd23.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 05, 2018, 11:22:54 PM
But please, someone tell me how purple haired SJWs are the problem.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 10, 2018, 02:43:01 AM
But please, someone tell me how purple haired SJWs are the problem.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sq-dcJrnGTM

No really, keep turning a blind eye to this kind of behavior which will do more to red pill the masses than any argument any conservative could ever put together.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 10, 2018, 06:31:50 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sq-dcJrnGTM

No really, keep turning a blind eye to this kind of behavior which will do more to red pill the masses than any argument any conservative could ever put together.
"Red pill"

Talking like a 4chan poster to own the libs
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 15, 2018, 04:38:21 PM
Elizabeth Warren with a glorious self-own today
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 15, 2018, 04:50:27 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/kimtallbear/status/1051906470923493377

https://mobile.twitter.com/justinwingerter/status/1051943041576169476
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 15, 2018, 05:24:03 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/kimtallbear/status/1051906470923493377

https://mobile.twitter.com/justinwingerter/status/1051943041576169476

They're interesting statements. I honestly don't know why she's bothering to do this, I don't see what relevance it has to anything.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 15, 2018, 05:26:20 PM
https://twitter.com/bobhugin/status/1051881727382175751

Election SZN
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 15, 2018, 07:19:01 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/kimtallbear/status/1051906470923493377

https://mobile.twitter.com/justinwingerter/status/1051943041576169476

HAHAHAHAHAHA

Lieawatha BTFO.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 15, 2018, 07:49:05 PM
Not sure what she thought would happen. Obama produced a birth certificate and birthers just moved on to lynching jokes. Not much to be gained.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 15, 2018, 07:52:11 PM
Not sure what she thought would happen. Obama produced a birth certificate and birthers just moved on to lynching jokes. Not much to be gained.

Right, nothing to be gained and no one was talking about this so she could have let it go.  Curious timing before midterms.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 15, 2018, 07:56:33 PM
Right, nothing to be gained and no one was talking about this so she could have let it go.  Curious timing before midterms.
If all voters have lowered their bar to 2016 levels it won't matter, since lying isn't exactly a disqualifying trait anymore.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 15, 2018, 08:28:42 PM
If all voters have lowered their bar to 2016 levels it won't matter, since lying isn't exactly a disqualifying trait anymore.

All too many voters would rather hear convenient lies than unpleasant truths these days. That's not a phenomenon limited to the US.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 16, 2018, 09:30:18 AM
http://apnews.com/27d20f50883d47e4926ec28f27343274

Quote
ALTON, Ill. (AP) — After last year’s deadly clash between white nationalists and counter-protesters in Charlottesville, Virginia, the federal government quietly spent millions of dollars to hire private security guards to stand watch over at least eight Confederate cemeteries, documents from the Department of Veterans Affairs show.

Good use of VA money. Can't afford to hire more staff though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 16, 2018, 10:13:42 AM
http://apnews.com/27d20f50883d47e4926ec28f27343274

Good use of VA money. Can't afford to hire more staff though.

Hopefully this doesn’t cut into the Space Force budget
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 16, 2018, 12:07:31 PM
http://apnews.com/27d20f50883d47e4926ec28f27343274

Good use of VA money. Can't afford to hire more staff though.

I know, we should just go back to the days Obama was in charge and placed General Shinseki as Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

No more guards standing over confederate statues, just veterans dying on waiting lists.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on October 16, 2018, 12:36:52 PM
HAHAHAHAHAHA

Lieawatha BTFO.
I know, we should just go back to the days Obama was in charge and placed General Shinseki as Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

No more guards standing over confederate statues, just veterans dying on waiting lists.

I have to say, I remain impressed by your dedication to upholding the image of a pure, undiluted partisan hack.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 16, 2018, 12:46:05 PM
I know, we should just go back to the days Obama was in charge and placed General Shinseki as Secretary of Veterans Affairs.

No more guards standing over confederate statues, just veterans dying on waiting lists.
You're right, efforts to privatize the VA have rotted the agency. Full single payer now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 16, 2018, 12:51:43 PM
I have to say, I remain impressed by your dedication to upholding the image of a pure, undiluted partisan hack.

I knew the mere mention of Liz Warren as Fauxahontas would draw you out.

Your insistence on continuing to defend this psycho and her not only ridiculous lie every time she brings up her family history, but her demonstrative profiteering off of this speaks a lot more towards your own partisan hackery then it does my own. She's a freaking fraud, (not just on this), the media in trying to run cover for her has done more to argue towards Trump's point that they're just a mass entity of lying twats then he ever could. You got ABC News actually running the beginning of their story as "Senator Warren calling the Presidents bluff!" Yea, she called it alright, with the worst hand I've ever seen. Time running a headline that she was proven right. HAHAHAHAHAHA.

As for the second quote, maybe my priorities are out of whack, but yes I'll be willing to let a little frivolous spending go from the VA if it means 17 veterans don't die due to inaction and bureaucracy from a horrifically mismanaged system. Like what happened under the previous administration for example. 

You're right, efforts to privatize the VA have rotted the agency. Full single payer now.

Just to recap:

The VA under the closest thing to a universal system we had in this country: people dying on waiting lists, rampant corruption.

The VA privatized: some funds are being directed to prevent statues from being torn down by crazy, fat, blue haired leftists. Like the ones seen blocking traffic in Portland.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 16, 2018, 01:01:36 PM
When people talk about Trump Derangement Syndrome it's shocking that they aren't talking about people who went from "I'd be happy with a tax cut" to "MUH BLUEHAIRED DEGENRATS".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 16, 2018, 01:03:17 PM
When people talk about Trump Derangement Syndrome it's shocking that they aren't talking about people who went from "I'd be happy with a tax cut" to "MUH BLUEHAIRED DEGENRATS".

I know, we should just talk about people who somehow rationalize calls for political violence from sitting Democratic congresswomen.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 16, 2018, 01:06:00 PM
I know, we should just talk about people who somehow rationalize calls for political violence from sitting Democratic congresswomen.
Rationalize? I straight up endorse that excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 16, 2018, 01:06:50 PM
Rationalize? I straight up endorse that excrement.

And that makes you a piece of excrement.

Sorry, there is no sugarcoating this. You are literally advocating for violence against your political opposites.

We live in a country that is by and large, centrist. They will put up with buffoonery, especially if employment is available and especially if the other option is advocating for violence and lawlessness. This is why the left will continue to lose. Imagine a party in opposition to the President that's unable to take a majority of the Senate? That's historically bad.

Enjoy taking the House, passing an extremely hollow impeachment and then watching as Trump becomes the first sitting President to be impeached and be elected to a second term.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 16, 2018, 01:09:36 PM


And that makes you a piece of excrement.

Sorry, there is no sugarcoating this. You are literally advocating for violence against your political opposites.

Unlike carrying out political violence on immigrants. That's fine.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on October 16, 2018, 01:10:04 PM
I knew the mere mention of Liz Warren as Fauxahontas would draw you out.

Your insistence on continuing to defend this psycho and her not only ridiculous lie every time she brings up her family history, but her demonstrative profiteering off of this speaks a lot more towards your own partisan hackery then it does my own.

Ah yes, being embarrassed that inane name-calling seems to be the standard of political discourse in this country is a sign of my partisan hackery. Good point, as always.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 16, 2018, 01:10:33 PM

Unlike carrying out political violence on immigrants. That's fine.

It's political violence only if you're deluded enough to believe that air condition tents and ample provisions equate to Auschwitz.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on October 16, 2018, 01:12:19 PM
It's political violence only if you're deluded enough to believe that air condition tents and ample provisions equate to Auschwitz.

... political violence must be Auschwitz level or it's not real? Gatekeeping the definition of violence, more well-reasoned political debating in the modern age.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 16, 2018, 01:34:17 PM
... political violence must be Auschwitz level or it's not real? Gatekeeping the definition of violence, more well-reasoned political debating in the modern age.


...what?

Ok then. Putting undocumented children in humane conditions https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/inside-tornillo-the-expanded-tent-city-for-migrant-children/ar-BBOiTHd and not the cages they had been previously locked in under the last administration while their parents asylum claims are being processed, is not the same as roundhouse kicking some pro-life advocate (misguided as they may be), a former candidate for President feeding into angry mobs by saying, "we can't be civil until our side retakes power" or as the left likes to do, any of the Nazi concentration camps such as Auschwitz or Buchenwald that they're so frequently compared to.

For what it's worth, Zodiac Killer introduced legislation in the Senate to divert more funds to the border by way of increasing funding for legal services, installing more immigration judges and streamlining the process so that these claims would be more quickly adjudicated and therefore these kids would have a clear and defined timeline for detention in these facilities. Of course, it wasn't even considered by Senate Democrats so as not to forfeit the talking point.

And before anyone shits on legal services, those people are the true believers, and I would have full faith in their ability to fairly represent anyone with a legitimate claim of asylum.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on October 16, 2018, 02:08:52 PM

...what?

Good question. You're the one who said immigrants only suffer political violence to people who believe the conditions "equate to Auschwitz." Quite confusing indeed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 16, 2018, 03:14:29 PM
Good question. You're the one who said immigrants only suffer political violence to people who believe the conditions "equate to Auschwitz." Quite confusing indeed.

That's not what I said at all, but failing an actual argument, why not harp on a misinterpretation?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 17, 2018, 02:23:26 PM
http://m.startribune.com/minnesota-house-candidate-says-he-was-attacked-at-benton-county-restaurant/497605921/

This is fine because they’re obviously facists or whatever
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on October 18, 2018, 12:51:13 AM
That's not what I said at all
Quote
It's political violence only if you're deluded enough to believe that air condition tents and ample provisions equate to Auschwitz.

Honestly have no idea what you mean.



Regarding immigrants, the two inane things you said were (1) the implication that they don't suffer from political violence (the separating of families is political violence, regardless of the conditions that the children are kept in) and (2) that Democrats shot down Ted Cruz's anti-family separation bill.

News from June/July indicated Feinstein and Cruz were working on a bipartisan compromise, not sure what propaganda outlet indicated to you that the Senate Dems either had the capacity or desire to ensure Cruz's bill would fail.

Regarding Elizabeth Warren - I have never particularly defended her, I have no strong feelings regarding her belief that her family was part American Indian. Seems like she genuinely believed it, and also seems like she's never particularly done anything to improve the living conditions of indigenous North Americans. Generally seems idiotic to give a excrement about one way or another, unless you're a member of her family.

Regarding the VA, the tragedy has always been the unnecessary wars we've fought since 2001. The waste of human life has been horrific and idiotic. Corruption in the VA has been tied to people trying to cover their own asses when underfunded systems are overtaxed by returning soldiers we never had plans for. What happened in the Arizona VA program is horrible, and attempts to politicize the suicides of veterans who were waiting to try get mental health care disgusts me. The amount of profit wrung from the bodies of sick and dead veterans is also disgusting.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 18, 2018, 09:31:51 AM
Honestly have no idea what you mean.



Regarding immigrants, the two inane things you said were (1) the implication that they don't suffer from political violence (the separating of families is political violence, regardless of the conditions that the children are kept in) and (2) that Democrats shot down Ted Cruz's anti-family separation bill.

News from June/July indicated Feinstein and Cruz were working on a bipartisan compromise, not sure what propaganda outlet indicated to you that the Senate Dems either had the capacity or desire to ensure Cruz's bill would fail.

Regarding Elizabeth Warren - I have never particularly defended her, I have no strong feelings regarding her belief that her family was part American Indian. Seems like she genuinely believed it, and also seems like she's never particularly done anything to improve the living conditions of indigenous North Americans. Generally seems idiotic to give a excrement about one way or another, unless you're a member of her family.

Regarding the VA, the tragedy has always been the unnecessary wars we've fought since 2001. The waste of human life has been horrific and idiotic. Corruption in the VA has been tied to people trying to cover their own asses when underfunded systems are overtaxed by returning soldiers we never had plans for. What happened in the Arizona VA program is horrible, and attempts to politicize the suicides of veterans who were waiting to try get mental health care disgusts me. The amount of profit wrung from the bodies of sick and dead veterans is also disgusting.

1. The separation of children from their families during the asylum process is not political violence, but rather the only available option given existing legislation. The alternative is to incentivize people bringing their children to the border by essentially ensuring that if you have a kid, it's a get out of jail free card. What should we do? Release them into the general population while their claims are being processed, so that if and when the asylum claim is determined to be bogus its a moot point anyway? Sorry we aren't going back to catch and release, and that the leftist dream of open borders is completely unpalatable to the rest of the nation, not to mention idiotic. I'm not, "gatekeeping" anything, you're utilizing hyperbole and an emotional appeal by using the term "political violence" and comparing keeping people in humane conditions to enforce rational immigration law to psycho protesters blocking traffic, harassing people at dinner and putting their hands on others because there's otherwise no substance to the argument.

Like every other sovereign nation in the history of the world, we're allowed to enforce our border and at least attempt to keep some semblance of order at the border and meaningfulness to the existing laws we have. "Political violence" is to allow unfettered illegal immigration in this country, with the social and economic consequences specifically to the lower and middle class that follow.

Democrats in the Senate did shoot down Ted Cruz's bill. Not sure what propaganda outlet convince you otherwise. Feinstein's bill was utter dreck and again, a vehicle that would've ensured the return of catch-and-release at best.

Regarding Elizabeth Warren, literally every time I bring up what a fraud she is, you run to her defense. It's an idiotic thing to give a excrement about until you realize the sad state of affairs where a politician can repeatedly state a lie, release a DNA test that does absolutely nothing to bolster her claim, and know that the establishment media will try to gaslight their way into giving her the victory on the subject. CNN, WaPo, Time, they all tried to paint this as a situation where the test proved her claim. If they're willing to lie about this, what else are they willing to lie about, besides anything that would ensure the end of Drumpf. And, while I'm not a believer in cultural appropriation, she literally used Native Americans as a pet ancestry to advance her career. This is a woman that in law review releases, other academic material and on her actual senate page was referred to as a person of color.

Regarding the VA scandal, what's really horrifying is having a single payer system demonstratively fail and argue that we should go back because of an utter cult like devotion to a shitty system. I'm not trying to politicize anything, I'm not the one that made that claim. It's not "politicizing" an issue by stating that a previous system failed, and wanting better. For what it's worth, I agree that the last thing we should be doing is still engaging in "depose-and-replace" around the world and nation building in areas that don't want us there and aren't interested in our efforts to change their leadership. Hence why I didn't vote for a war-mongering hawk who's record as Secretary of State speaks for itself.

You're a hack who self-projects while trying to maintain some sort of guise of independence and rationality. You look past every single instance of partisan commentary in this sub, you look past every demonstrated sign of political violence being perpetrated by the left, lying in wait just to harp on my latest post. You can stay on my johnson if you'd like, but it's weird.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on October 22, 2018, 06:47:21 AM
I think this speaks for itself. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fZcHKAbl4UA
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 24, 2018, 08:31:50 AM
Pipe bombs intercepted and defused in the personal mail of George Soros and the Clintons.

Those evil violent lefties are at it again.

Edit: also Barack Obama's office.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 24, 2018, 09:09:48 AM
Pipe bombs intercepted and defused in the personal mail of George Soros and the Clintons.

Those evil violent lefties are at it again.

Edit: also Barack Obama's office.

...

https://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/ricinlaced-letter-sent-to-pentagon-jim-mattis-admiral-john-richardson/news-story/a37de518e2b9753c314b5ae49c9cad98

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/06/congressional-baseball-shooter-hated-republicans-has-died-of-injuries.html

I know, its only the right-wing with a violent streak. You aren't this dumb.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 24, 2018, 09:27:24 AM
...

https://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/ricinlaced-letter-sent-to-pentagon-jim-mattis-admiral-john-richardson/news-story/a37de518e2b9753c314b5ae49c9cad98

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2017/06/congressional-baseball-shooter-hated-republicans-has-died-of-injuries.html

I know, its only the right-wing with a violent streak. You aren't this dumb.

It's probably a false flag operation to make the right wing look bad in advance of the midterms. My guess is that Soros paid for them himself.

Time Warner's head office as well, BTW. Presumably aimed at CNN.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 24, 2018, 10:16:50 AM
It's probably a false flag operation to make the right wing look bad in advance of the midterms. My guess is that Soros paid for them himself.

Time Warner's head office as well, BTW. Presumably aimed at CNN.

I mean, in fairness, what can I say. I've seen the conspiracy theory being floated about, it's incredibly dumb.

Though Time Warner's head office being on the list is a bit suspicious. Almost trying to drive the point home that this was indeed one of those crazy redneck Trumptards/Trumpkins.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 24, 2018, 02:24:40 PM
https://twitter.com/cnnpolitics/status/1055148501192138752

*false flag comments intensify*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on October 24, 2018, 03:09:01 PM
I'm clearly no Trump fan, but I commend him for denouncing any attempts at terrorism. Calling the acts "abhorrent" and calling for unity. That's acting Presidential.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on October 25, 2018, 03:44:16 AM
I'm clearly no Trump fan, but I commend him for denouncing any attempts at terrorism. Calling the acts "abhorrent" and calling for unity. That's acting Presidential.
That's literally the bare minimum. I mean, these days, that's still an accomplishment by Trump, but are we really giving him credit for saying terrorism is bad?

Wait a week, and he'll be saying they're false bomb threats by the libs at his mob rallies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on October 25, 2018, 12:03:35 PM
That's literally the bare minimum. I mean, these days, that's still an accomplishment by Trump, but are we really giving him credit for saying terrorism is bad?

Wait a week, and he'll be saying they're false bomb threats by the libs at his mob rallies.

You know, the other day he called out the Fed, which I agreed with. I don't think they should be repeatedly raising the rate. Then he said that, and I thought "Okay, this is better."

But he didn't even wait a day before turning around and blaming the "liberal media" and its "fake news" for causing the sentiment that led to these attacks.

Also, who the hell sends an IED to Robert De Niro?!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 25, 2018, 12:11:09 PM
You know, the other day he called out the Fed, which I agreed with. I don't think they should be repeatedly raising the rate. Then he said that, and I thought "Okay, this is better."

But he didn't even wait a day before turning around and blaming the "liberal media" and its "fake news" for causing the sentiment that led to these attacks.

Also, who the hell sends an IED to Robert De Niro?!

Any of these are acceptable answers:

A) George Soros
B) Honduran Immigrant Caravan
C) Antifa
D) ISIS
E) Russia
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 25, 2018, 12:14:45 PM
Pretty incredible that none of these bombs exploded. Either the perp is incompetent or they’re not really operational bombs
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on October 25, 2018, 12:15:25 PM
Any of these are acceptable answers:

A) George Soros
B) Honduran Immigrant Caravan
C) Antifa
D) ISIS
E) Russia

George Soros funded an Antifa plot to force Honduran Immigrants to convince ISIS to send a Russian bomb.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 25, 2018, 12:38:49 PM
George Soros funded an Antifa plot to force Honduran Immigrants to convince ISIS to send a Russian bomb.

Next up on Fox News...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on October 25, 2018, 01:34:46 PM
It makes me feel so good to hit "sleazebags" back -- much better than seeing a psychiatrist (which I never have!)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on October 25, 2018, 02:24:06 PM
I sent the packages
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 27, 2018, 02:10:42 PM
I haven't been following the news, has anyone stopped Maxine Waters's reign of terror?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 27, 2018, 11:47:08 PM
So when are certain peoples main picture being changed over to Daniel Frisiello?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: FlashGordon on October 28, 2018, 05:04:17 AM
Daniel Frisiello sent powder to Trump Jr.  He also sent a threatening letter to Debbie Stabenow (D-MI).  He also sent powder to a Stanford Law Prof because she was critical of a judge who was lenient in a sexual assault case (People v Turner 2015).

https://www.mv-voice.com/news/2018/09/10/man-pleads-guilty-to-mailing-powder-to-stanford-professor-others
Quote
She received on campus an envelope with white powder and a note that stated: "Since you are going to disrobe Persky, I am going to treat you like 'Emily Doe,'" referencing the victim in the Turner case. "Let's see what kind of sentence I get for being a rich white male."

This doesn't sound like someone who was radicalzed by Rachel Maddow or Hillary Clinton.  Which of these events in the last three days would you like to compare Frisiello to, the walking right-wing meme sending mailbombs, "whites don't kill whites" at Krogers in Kentucky, or the guy who shot up the synagogue because the GLOBALISTS (SorosJews) are funding the CARAVAN INVASION?     
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 28, 2018, 09:08:15 AM
Daniel Frisiello sent powder to Trump Jr.  He also sent a threatening letter to Debbie Stabenow (D-MI).  He also sent powder to a Stanford Law Prof because she was critical of a judge who was lenient in a sexual assault case (People v Turner 2015).

https://www.mv-voice.com/news/2018/09/10/man-pleads-guilty-to-mailing-powder-to-stanford-professor-others
This doesn't sound like someone who was radicalzed by Rachel Maddow or Hillary Clinton.  Which of these events in the last three days would you like to compare Frisiello to, the walking right-wing meme sending mailbombs, "whites don't kill whites" at Krogers in Kentucky, or the guy who shot up the synagogue because the GLOBALISTS (SorosJews) are funding the CARAVAN INVASION?     

It doesn't? Given Hillary's rhetoric lately, I'd argue otherwise.

Further your conflation of the term globalist as some sort of dog whistle for anti-semitism is straight out of the derriere end of the likes of Salon, but I get that there are those desperate to connect Trump or his supporters to yesterdays shooting even though the shooter demonstratively hated Trump. But like Rahm said, "never let a tragedy go to waste" amirite?!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: FlashGordon on October 29, 2018, 09:36:01 PM
It doesn't? Given Hillary's rhetoric lately, I'd argue otherwise.
I don't follow.  How would Hillary's rhetoric lately inspire Frisiello to mail powder to a liberal college professor and one of National Journal's Most Liberal Senators 2011 Debbie Stabenow?

Further your conflation of the term globalist as some sort of dog whistle for anti-semitism is straight out of the derriere end of the likes of Salon, but I get that there are those desperate to connect Trump or his supporters to yesterdays shooting even though the shooter demonstratively hated Trump. But like Rahm said, "never let a tragedy go to waste" amirite?!

"Globalist" as a coded anti-semitic slur predates Trump (and probably Salon!).  From 2003:

https://yaleglobal.yale.edu/content/antiglobalisms-jewish-problem
Quote
"People are losing their compass," observes Dan Dinar, a historian at Hebrew University. "A worldwide stock market, a new form of money, no borders. Concepts like country, nationality, everything is in doubt. They are looking for the ones who are guilty for this new situation and they find the Jews."

And here are two more recent links:

https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium-how-did-the-term-globalist-became-an-anti-semitic-slur-blame-bannon-1.5895925
https://www.adl.org/resources/reports/quantifying-hate-a-year-of-anti-semitism-on-twitter#%E2%80%9Cglobalist%E2%80%9D-as-code-word-for-%E2%80%9Cjew%E2%80%9D

I understand that you might consider yourself anti-globalist for purely economic reasons, but you should look around to see who is nodding in agreement with you and why.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 29, 2018, 10:50:57 PM
Prayers up to my boy Jefferson Davis Beauregard Sessions who was violently attacked by a (((Methodist))) pastor paid by real life Bond villain George Soros
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 30, 2018, 11:25:00 AM
^Considering the character of Dominic Greene was actually based on Soros, you aren't that far off.

Anyway, your typical violent right, at it again: https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-ne-volusia-county-republican-hq-shots-20181029-story.html?fbclid=IwAR3xBSS0eryivJuKATYHn0JXZsNyfTPwxwkHLTxq1q008zEIvnzM8oM_hE4

Funny how this was all over the news.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 05, 2018, 05:58:55 PM
Not even clicking because who cares

More importantly, the lovechild of 17a and guinness is running for Lt Governor of PA.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 05, 2018, 07:32:33 PM
Not even clicking because who cares

More importantly, the lovechild of 17a and guinness is running for Lt Governor of PA.

I know right, who cares when your false narratives are blown up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 05, 2018, 07:59:30 PM
LOL, a Trump fan complaining about false narratives.

"I've actually kept more promises than I've made. When did you ever hear that from a politician? Maybe never. Never. It's true."

That's not even lies. It's either rank stupidity or a good step on the road to full blown dementia.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 05, 2018, 09:04:06 PM
I know right, who cares when your false narratives are blown up.
Be sure to keep me informed every time a Young Republican gets chocolate milk thrown at them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 05, 2018, 09:43:56 PM
Be sure to keep me informed every time a Young Republican gets chocolate milk thrown at them.

A bullet through a window, but sure, chocolate milk!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 06, 2018, 05:32:30 PM
https://twitter.com/AlexanderMcCoy4/status/1059668847391883271?s=09
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 06, 2018, 06:11:11 PM
https://twitter.com/AlexanderMcCoy4/status/1059668847391883271?s=09

Amazing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 06, 2018, 09:27:19 PM
About what I expected. Glad to see the Kavanaugh disgrace had a direct impact in both Manchin keeping his seat and Donnelly and Heitkamp losing theirs.

Bob Menendez could apparently murder someone on 5th avenue and still get re-elected. 

Regardless of whether you guys want to believe it or not, I actually voted for a Democrat for my representative. We'll see if Malinowski actually tries to govern or spends the next two years repeating some sort of variation of, "orange man bad.'
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on November 07, 2018, 02:55:00 AM
you're utilizing hyperbole and an emotional appeal
Says the one who brought up Auschowitz?

Quote
Democrats in the Senate did shoot down Ted Cruz's bill.
Source?

Quote
Regarding Elizabeth Warren, literally every time I bring up what a fraud she is, you run to her defense.
I'll venmo you five bucks if you find a post where I run to Warren's defense. I don't know enough about her to defend her, I think you're confusing me with someone else.

Also a source regarding the single payer model of the VA being the reason for its failure? Curious to read what you've read.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 07, 2018, 09:10:10 AM
Bob Menendez could apparently murder someone on 15 avenue and still get re-elected. 
did you mean someone on 15th avenue or someone 15?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 07, 2018, 12:52:58 PM
Bob Menendez could apparently murder someone on 5th avenue and still get re-elected.

I don't like Menendez, and I don't have a horse in that race, but Republicans voted in a dead pimp yesterday rather than a Democrat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 07, 2018, 12:56:24 PM
I don't like Menendez, and I don't have a horse in that race, but Republicans voted in a dead pimp yesterday rather than a Democrat.

Also they re-elected Steve King, despite the National Republican Congressional Committee refusing to support his campaign due to him being a white supremacist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 07, 2018, 11:15:44 PM
Also they re-elected Steve King, despite the National Republican Congressional Committee refusing to support his campaign due to him being a white supremacist.

And Keith Ellison, an anti-semitic, racist gets elected AG up in Minnesota by Democrats. Do we want to go tit for tat or do you guys want to pretend that there's still some sort of moral high ground.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 07, 2018, 11:32:53 PM
And Keith Ellison, an anti-semitic, racist gets elected AG up in Minnesota by Democrats. Do we want to go tit for tat or do you guys want to pretend that there's still some sort of moral high ground.

a) That's a somewhat extreme interpretation of Ellison

b) You're still defending a President who confessed to sexual assault so you are always the loser in this game no matter how much you bleat
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 08, 2018, 12:18:21 AM
a) That's a somewhat extreme interpretation of Ellison

b) You're still defending a President who confessed to sexual assault so you are always the loser in this game no matter how much you bleat

A. No it's not.

B. You're not dumb enough to suggest an off-handed and off-color joke (which also literally discusses consent) equals sexual assault, so...what?


Oh, ONS I didn't forget about you bud.

Yeah, the follow-up where you call Elizabeth Warren "Lieawatha"? I don't have any patience for that level of bullshit buried in platitudes about how intelligently you manage to criticize Republicans occasionally too.

And not vote for them either, at least in the case of former Congressman Lance.

FWIW I went to bed yesterday saying, "Let's see how this Democratic House acts now that they've been afforded a majority by the American people. If they come out and hold Trump's feet to the fire on issues that he ran on that are traditionally Democratic endeavors such as infrastructure and introduce health care legislation (likely an ACA fix or re-entry that I wouldn't like but would likely appeal to most of the country) that holds him accountable for wanting to preserve pre-existing conditions, while largely either abandoning the Russian nonsense or just letting Schiff take the bullet on the evening talk show circuit because he'll be elected in perpetuity in California anyway, they're going to be making a great case for themselves and whoever the party nominates for 2020."

So of course, Jerry Nadler's first order of business is to try to impeach Kavanaugh! HAHAHAHAHAHA. In the immortal words of Joe Pesci, these guys could freak up a cup of coffee.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 08, 2018, 07:36:46 AM
For some reason, whenever i click on this thread the Itchy & Scratchy theme song plays in my head.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 08, 2018, 08:23:33 AM
For some reason, whenever i click on this thread the Itchy & Scratchy theme song plays in my head.

Hahahahahahaha. If you were a dirty communist you'd be thinking of the theme from Worker and Parasite!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 12, 2018, 10:57:44 AM
This seems like a colossally bad idea, unless you're a Trump supporter. (https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/12/clinton-aide-2020-run-983684[/url)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 12, 2018, 11:18:19 AM
This seems like a colossally bad idea, unless you're a Trump supporter. (https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/12/clinton-aide-2020-run-983684[/url)

Russian hax
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on November 12, 2018, 11:22:45 AM
This seems like a colossally bad idea, unless you're a Trump supporter. (https://www.politico.com/story/2018/11/12/clinton-aide-2020-run-983684[/url)

lmao dis bitch
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 14, 2018, 08:34:12 PM
@LAPDHQ:We can confirm that today LAPD Detectives arrested Michael Avenatti on suspicion of domestic violence. This is an ongoing investigation and we will provide more details as they become available.

Update: We can confirm that Michael Avenatti (DOB: 02-16-71) was booked this afternoon on a felony domestic violence charge (273.5 PC). His bail is set at $50,000.


Ha ha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 14, 2018, 09:40:25 PM
Quote
NEW: Avenatti issues statement through his law firm denying allegation: "I have never been physically abusive in my life nor was I last night.  Any accusations to the contrary are fabricated and meant to do harm to my reputation.”

The irony is delicious
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 14, 2018, 10:07:07 PM
The irony is delicious

#basta

This poopchute is the gift that keeps on giving.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 15, 2018, 07:39:13 AM
Almost gotta believe that this is a #Soros #FalseFlag by the libs to keep this guy from running and doing further damage
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 16, 2018, 02:16:26 PM
Did they catch those monsters that raped Tucker Carlson's family yet?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 18, 2018, 09:42:57 PM
“Brenda Snipes, Broward County’s embattled supervisor of elections, submitted her resignation Sunday.

Snipes’ resignation, first reported by the Sun-Sentinel, came only hours after her staff ended a brutal two-week stretch in which they misplaced 2,000 ballots during a statewide recount, mixed about two dozen invalid ballots with about 200 good ones, and blew a deadline to submit machine recount results to the state.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 19, 2018, 12:47:09 PM
Did they catch those monsters that raped Tucker Carlson's family yet?

https://twitter.com/MrAndyNgo/status/1064296591471783938

So brave. So tolerant.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Italian Seafood on November 20, 2018, 03:18:23 PM
(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/46468566_10218346804240599_1650678686313086976_n.jpg?_nc_cat=109&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.xx&oh=047b3e55c08eac44ae8058eca51c1b66&oe=5C681166)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 25, 2018, 05:13:49 PM
Imagine supporting Trump and thinking you can ever pull the intelligence card on someone.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on November 25, 2018, 05:17:48 PM
Imagine supporting Trump and thinking you can ever pull the intelligence card on someone.

Doesn't make AOC not a freaking idiot
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 25, 2018, 06:58:15 PM
Imagine supporting Trump and thinking you can ever pull the intelligence card on someone.

Always good for a laugh when the left attempts some sort of intellectual high ground.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 25, 2018, 07:53:24 PM
I'll be honest it's pretty hard to compete with the the intellectual platform of "poor people should die" but the fight continues.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 25, 2018, 07:57:50 PM
Doesn't make AOC not a freaking idiot
She's not but you do you man.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 25, 2018, 07:58:50 PM
Meanwhile

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181126/515d39425e6b539005610ba31f0208a0.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 25, 2018, 08:06:27 PM
I'll be honest it's pretty hard to compete with the the intellectual platform of "poor people should die" but the fight continues.

The reason that college educated people are more likely to be liberals is because education makes you stupid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 25, 2018, 08:28:32 PM
Meanwhile

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181126/515d39425e6b539005610ba31f0208a0.jpg)

Look at all the women and children

https://mobile.twitter.com/epochtimes/status/1066480704115146752
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 25, 2018, 08:56:49 PM
Look at all the women and children

https://mobile.twitter.com/epochtimes/status/1066480704115146752

You're right, tear gassing men would be way more acceptable.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 25, 2018, 09:08:49 PM
You're right, tear gassing men would be way more acceptable.

Agree

https://mobile.twitter.com/epochtimes/status/1066785015256809474
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on November 25, 2018, 09:29:39 PM
Won’t you please consider the reggaeton my goodness
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 26, 2018, 07:29:12 AM
Quote
Although the majority of the group approached and gathered at the fence peacefully, Mexico’s Interior Ministry said that hundreds tried to cross the border in a “violent manner.” Mexican authorities said they would deport anyone who tried to cross illegally.

smh fascists
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 26, 2018, 07:31:35 AM
Quote
TIJUANA, Mexico — U.S. authorities closed off the busiest port of entry along the U.S. border with Mexico on Sunday and fired tear gas at members of a Central American migrant caravan who had rushed the fencing that separates the countries.

Although the number of people at the border was relatively small, the unrest — with migrants attempting to climb fences and run through car lanes to reach the United States, and scenes of mothers and children choking on tear gas — represented a serious escalation of the crisis.

What began Sunday morning as a migrant protest of the slow pace of the U.S. asylum claims process devolved into a chaotic scramble in which hundreds made their way to the border hoping to cross onto U.S. soil. To block that from happening, and as some threw rocks and bottles, Customs and Border Protection (CBP) officers took the rare step of firing tear gas into Mexico as well as closing all legal vehicle and foot traffic to the San Ysidro border crossing, which U.S. officials say normally has about 100,000 visitors per day.

—-

Some of the migrants tried to breach the border fencing and “sought to harm CBP personnel by throwing projectiles at them,” the statement said.

—-

The statement added that during the day, there were “multiple instances of persons throwing projectiles at CBP personnel” and “multiple confirmed apprehensions” of those who tried to enter the U.S. illegally, as well as “many additional attempts to cross the border illegally.”

Washington Post
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 26, 2018, 01:50:18 PM
Anybody see the damning federal climate report get buried on Black Friday?

How about Russia attacking 3 Ukrainian ships? Then the POTUS taking to his Twitter account to tell Europe they need to pay more into NATO if they want us to remain friends.

Weird how we suddenly tear gassed a bunch of dirty foreigners at almost the same time. And how it then dominated the news cycle. Really weird.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 29, 2018, 08:05:12 AM
https://winnipegsun.com/sports/wrestling/jesse-ventura-considering-running-against-trump-for-president/wcm/f5d55399-c246-46be-b7f1-e33c9c1ab8d7



do it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 29, 2018, 10:35:53 AM
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2018/nov/29/stormy-daniels-michael-avenatti-trump-defamation-lawsuit

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 03, 2018, 06:50:50 AM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181203/0537f5d97ad2821929f5fca0790f204d.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 09, 2018, 09:00:13 AM
Just posting this before Seafood does.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20181209/2c20b59a12c9058e9fe969ef8f716f8f.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on December 09, 2018, 09:34:26 AM
I thought the average was lower
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 03, 2019, 01:46:27 PM
https://twitter.com/cbsnews/status/1080554654352793609

(https://media.giphy.com/media/ifxLK48cnyDDi/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 03, 2019, 06:30:05 PM
https://twitter.com/cbsnews/status/1080554654352793609

(https://media.giphy.com/media/ifxLK48cnyDDi/giphy.gif)

Brought to you by the same people that were oh so outraged that Kavanaugh likes beer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 05, 2019, 03:23:07 AM
ya nobody was outraged he liked beer. the issue was he was yelling it like it was a defense against allegations of assault
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 05, 2019, 12:01:26 PM
Ah freak, that's good. 

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Dv_7fjIVAAEV_f-.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 05, 2019, 03:26:47 PM
ya nobody was outraged he liked beer. the issue was he was yelling it like it was a defense against allegations of assault

People were using his admission of enjoying beer as some sort of evidence that he was a serial rapist.

What happened to him was disgusting and I’m glad the electoral fallout what was it was.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 05, 2019, 08:26:32 PM
https://twitter.com/ewarren/status/1081718214978093057

Lol, the replies, lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 16, 2019, 10:59:12 AM
Quote
The DNC has become the latest group to remove its name from the list of sponsors of the Women’s March less than 24 hours after one of the March’s leaders refused to denounce Louis Farrakhan

I’m suprised this happened, but this was a good decision if you’ve been reading any of the stories about what’s going on with this
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 16, 2019, 11:02:34 AM
https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/276694/is-the-womens-march-melting-down

This was... interesting
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 16, 2019, 12:46:13 PM
https://www.tabletmag.com/jewish-news-and-politics/276694/is-the-womens-march-melting-down

This was... interesting

It was long. I managed the first few paragraphs and then decided I didn't care enough to dedicate another 20 minutes to it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 16, 2019, 01:32:27 PM
It was long. I managed the first few paragraphs and then decided I didn't care enough to dedicate another 20 minutes to it.

If you’d like I can mansplain it to you
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 16, 2019, 05:48:34 PM
If you’d like I can mansplain it to you

You can if you like but I don't promise to care any more than I do now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 19, 2019, 01:05:58 PM
This excrement that just happened in DC...

We have 15 year old kids shouting build the wall at Native Americans.  I hope that entire group gets doxxed and ridiculed forever.

Make America Great Again?  freak Donald Trump and the wall he wants that will hopefully never be built.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 19, 2019, 03:20:04 PM
This excrement that just happened in DC...

We have 15 year old kids shouting build the wall at Native Americans.  I hope that entire group gets doxxed and ridiculed forever.

Make America Great Again?  freak Donald Trump and the wall he wants that will hopefully never be built.

cry about it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on January 19, 2019, 03:23:16 PM
And Mexico’s gonna pay for it!!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 19, 2019, 04:34:29 PM
cry about it.

If you support those kids, you are a bigger piece of excrement than I thought.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on January 19, 2019, 05:14:22 PM
I hope all those kids get sent hiv infused blankets and sent on a trail of tears to the nearest hood.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 19, 2019, 05:33:54 PM
If you support those kids, you are a bigger piece of excrement than I thought.

They're little fifteen year old cunts. That doesn't warrant you wishing their doxxing and a scarlet letter on their name for the rest of their lives. Your excrement overreaction is excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 19, 2019, 06:03:07 PM
They're little fifteen year old cunts. That doesn't warrant you wishing their doxxing and a scarlet letter on their name for the rest of their lives. Your excrement overreaction is excrement.

I actually hope all of them die.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 19, 2019, 06:43:34 PM
Those kids are pond scum....have some freaking respect
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 19, 2019, 06:44:36 PM
cry about it.
Settle down, Dweezil.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 19, 2019, 08:51:13 PM
I actually hope all of them die.

Hahahahahahaha. HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA. AAAAAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 19, 2019, 09:14:56 PM
^standard issue response
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 19, 2019, 09:27:25 PM
mj2sexay never responded when IATA asked him if he was an uncle fucker.

With views like this, I think it’s safe to say his uncle isn’t the only family member that cums inside of him.

“It’s okay to be racist if you’re wearing a MAGA hat!”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 20, 2019, 04:44:35 AM
mj2sexay never responded when IATA asked him if he was an uncle fucker.

With views like this, I think it’s safe to say his uncle isn’t the only family member that cums inside of him.

“It’s okay to be racist if you’re wearing a MAGA hat!”

Yeah, freak you, you queynte. "With views like this' With views like what? That even accepting the version of events originally put forth by sources I wouldn't pee on if they were on fire (like Buzzfeed for example which of course gets no mention here because of the absolute DEBACLE of a weekend they've had pumping misinformation to hopeful retards like yourself), I don't think these kids deserve to be doxxed and have their lives ruined because of some stupid excrement they did at 15? Or is it the view that like every other sovereign nation in the HISTORY OF THE freaking WORLD, we're allowed to have a secure and defendable border as opposed to leaving our border patrol out in a dangerous area with their cocks in their hands? Like I said, go cry about the wall or these fifteen year olds some more, but do it on old Talcum X's page, you'll get a lot of support and be seen as so courageous. So brave.

It's ok, or at least doesn't get a peep out of you when some adult leftist excrement spin kicks a woman, or verbally or even physically assaults some elderly veteran or something. No reaction there.

But when some snotnosed 15 year olds act like douchebags (and given their account and the video evidence to back their account, I'm starting to think they aren't as unsympathetic as originally portrayed-big shock there), according to you they are ripe for summary execution.

Why don't you just reconcile yourself to the fact you're an easily deceivable rube before worrying about who cums where.

^standard issue response

Yeah, it is a standard issue response when someone makes a statement that indicates they're emotionally deranged. I wAnT tHosE kIds DeAd!
Wow. Get a freaking grip.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 20, 2019, 05:05:37 AM
Yeah, I've now seen enough footage to see how absolutely (and typically) cunty your rush to judgment was.

To recap: Kids were at a March for Life rally long since planned. An Indigenous Peoples rally was being held at the same date, and of course, by pure coincidence and not out of a more sinister motive was moved to coincide directly with that march. That's fine.

Kids were minding their own business, guy comes up to them with a drum and starts drumming right in their face. Kids DO NOT SHOUT BUILD THE WALL (like you had claimed taking your cue from the usual suspects who were probably cumming their pants at the optics of the whole situation, namely white kid in a Maga hat smiling like a smarmy little douche at an elderly native american), but instead one stands their and smiles at him in a mocking manner. There is absolutely NOTHING odious about that. What's the kid supposed to do? Move? Why? He was minding his own business. Guy actually APPROACHED THEM and said, "this is not your land, go back to where you came from."

freak your freaking stupid overreaction because unfortunately you're as susceptible as the others who STILL some freaking two years later can't get over the results on 11/9/16.  What you idiots never seem to understand when trying to manipulate situations to fit a narrative is that someone else is usually also taking a video.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P-S4Hz6wOYg&feature=youtu.be&fbclid=IwAR1hdO3h62hirpbFKQ_oDR2vAjfQGwf72no76ecnceGJsvcMGD0RMVFl8eY

Where was the outrage? Oh, the old man was in support of a conservative figure? Then this child is clearly just a sweet innocent child, no harm should befall her!

You're a joke.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 20, 2019, 06:16:32 AM
You are a product of incest
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 20, 2019, 06:21:49 AM
You product of incest

Great comeback, substantive and witty.

I know the admission that you're a gullible rube who took the company line from the MSM and ran with it before the facts came out is never coming, but I also don't care. You're the one that has to reconcile yourself to the fact that you reacted the same way your typical fat, purple haired low information retard reacts. The subsequent evidence that has emerged showing what really happened speaks for itself.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 20, 2019, 06:24:24 AM
Great comeback, substantive and witty.

I know the admission that you're a gullible rube who took the company line from the MSM and ran with it before the facts came out is never coming, but I also don't care. You're the one that has to reconcile yourself to the fact that you reacted the same way your typical fat, purple haired low information retard reacts. The subsequent evidence that has emerged showing what really happened speaks for itself.



If a wall is built, I hope you are murdered by a white American.

If the wall is not built,  I’m still hoping for the same result.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 20, 2019, 06:27:15 AM
If a wall is built, I hope you are murdered by a white American.

If the wall is not built,  I’m still hoping for the same result.

Next time just post a picture of a white flag, its a lot easier.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 20, 2019, 06:28:45 AM
Next time just post a picture of a white flag, its a lot easier.

Build that wall
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 20, 2019, 06:44:25 AM
Build that wall

If that's what it takes to secure the border-sure. Why are we not entitled to border security and a comprehensive vetting system to determine immigration status and eligibility?

Out of curiosity are we still calling for the deaths of kids who literally did nothing besides be white, smile, and wear MAGA hats?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 20, 2019, 07:56:02 AM


Out of curiosity are we still calling for the deaths of kids who literally did nothing besides be white, smile, and wear MAGA hats?

Just the ones with swastika tattoos.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 20, 2019, 08:10:14 AM
Just the ones with swastika tattoos.

MUH NAZIS!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 20, 2019, 08:22:44 AM
MUH NAZIS!
Oh heyyyy...your current furor should have the blueprints for the Berlin Wall if the previous furor kept them in a safe place. Your wall should be up in no time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 20, 2019, 08:30:07 AM
Oh heyyyy...your current furor should have the blueprints for the Berlin Wall if the previous furor kept them in a safe place. Your wall should be up in no time.

Jeez, this comment is just one big giant mess.

Furor is the irrational public outcry against a bunch of kids for the high crime of wearing a MAGA hat while white and standing and smiling while a drum is getting beaten in their face. As opposed to the good little choir children of the left who would never do something like scream and harass a disabled veteran. Never, ever, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uio8pgcjY7Q ever.

Fuhrer is what you were going for, the problem of course being that Hitler didn't build the Berlin wall.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 20, 2019, 08:42:25 AM
Jeez, this comment is just one big giant mess.

Furor is the irrational public outcry against a bunch of kids for the high crime of wearing a MAGA hat while white and standing and smiling while a drum is getting beaten in their face. As opposed to the good little choir children of the left who would never do something like scream and harass a disabled veteran. Never, ever, https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Uio8pgcjY7Q ever.

Fuhrer is what you were going for, the problem of course being that Hitler didn't build the Berlin wall.

Grammar Nazi too eh...you’re a multitasker!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on January 20, 2019, 08:57:36 AM
Orange man bad :(
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 20, 2019, 10:51:30 AM
It's too bad Nicholas Cruz didn't go to Cov Cath HS.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 20, 2019, 10:58:08 AM
It's too bad Nicholas Cruz didn't go to Cov Cath HS.

I wish I could show these kids comments like this to correct their pro-life stance.

If people who think this way want to cull their own, LET THEM.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on January 20, 2019, 01:46:08 PM
It's too bad Nicholas Cruz didn't go to Cov Cath HS.

I bet you're the type of person who thinks Norway's prison system is one the US should emulate
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 20, 2019, 01:51:24 PM
I bet you're the type of person who thinks Norway's prison system is one the US should emulate

Doesn't Norway have one of the world's lowest rates of recidivism?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on January 20, 2019, 01:56:19 PM
Doesn't Norway have one of the world's lowest rates of recidivism?

That is indeed my point
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 20, 2019, 03:34:47 PM
That is indeed my point

Apologies, nuance is sometimes hard to read.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 20, 2019, 03:39:03 PM
That is indeed my point
Their hockey team stinks doe
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 20, 2019, 03:49:38 PM
Their hockey team stinks doe

Someone whose team just got humped by the Stars should probably not be making this argument.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 20, 2019, 04:17:58 PM
Someone whose team just got humped by the Stars should probably not be making this argument.
Right after we raped the Preds and Knights....sit down.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 20, 2019, 04:55:07 PM
Right after we raped the Preds and Knights....sit down.

The Predators are weird. In the last few games they've beaten the Leafs and Capitals and lost to the Canes, Jackets and Panthers.

I watched the Stars the other night, as you know, and they're rubbish. And you lost to them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 20, 2019, 05:12:46 PM
The Predators are weird. In the last few games they've beaten the Leafs and Capitals and lost to the Canes, Jackets and Panthers.

I watched the Stars the other night, as you know, and they're rubbish. And you lost to them.
We beat the Stars a week before....

Find a hobby.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 20, 2019, 05:23:15 PM
We beat the Stars a week before....

Find a hobby.

I have one, it's winding you up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 20, 2019, 05:26:38 PM
I have one, it's winding you up.

I thought it was midget wrestling
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 20, 2019, 05:27:25 PM
I thought it was midget wrestling

Got sick of losing to the big ones.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 20, 2019, 05:30:49 PM
Got sick of losing to the big ones.
I respect that
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 20, 2019, 10:13:37 PM
The kids did nothing wrong.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 20, 2019, 11:08:33 PM
The kids did nothing wrong.

Racism is OK in your book though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 20, 2019, 11:45:52 PM
Racism is OK in your book though.

You really need to watch the footage of what took place before you're willing to throw fifteen year old kids under the bus, not to mention wish death on them. Do you think I'd be supporting them if what they were accused of were true? This was a massive railroading by a media that has had just an absolutely horrible week.

If you want to think their hats are stupid as excrement, their politics are stupid as excrement, their reason for being there are stupid as excrement, thats fine, it's a separate discussion.

These kids have now been the subject of non-stop harassment and vitriol from the outrage mob when the video shows they did nothing wrong. Nothing. They were literally being verbally abused by an INSANE black separatist group. And all of a sudden in the middle of getting yelled at, a bunch of freaking native protestors come into where they're standing, their leader beating his stupid drum in this kids face. These kids didn't mob this freaking guy like he said, he walked right into them.

Nathan Phillips is full of excrement. I initially wanted to give the man the benefit of the doubt both being from a segment of our population that has been historically assraped by this country, and as a veteran. He's a freaking liar. For him to call these kids, "beasts" and tell WaPo that he was defending the BLACK SEPARATISTS WHO WERE SHOUTING RACIAL EPITHETS AND CALLING THESE KIDS FAGGOTS is just so disgusting. If I was one of these kids parents I'd knock that old lover of the older lady out for putting my kid in this position and then completely lying about what happened. This is a man that couldn't find the humanity to support kids from being screamed at by a group of freaking psychos because they had white skin and MAGA hats on. So freak him, and save me the lecture about racism.

The ultimate irony is the video footage taken was from the insane, "Black Hebrew Israelites" who spent their time spewing vitriolic excrement at a bunch of high school sophomores.

Serious question. If a random old guy walks up to you banging on a drum, what is on the list of approved response?

Since standing there, looking silly and awkwardly smiling on occasion is clearly off the table.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 21, 2019, 08:43:40 AM


Serious question. If a random old guy walks up to you banging on a drum, what is on the list of approved response?



I would've punched that Native in the face, and stolen his wallet.  But this isn't 1994.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 21, 2019, 08:02:46 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/justaddwine_/status/1087396564027482113

Disgusting
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on January 21, 2019, 09:48:38 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/justaddwine_/status/1087396564027482113

Disgusting
Do these people sit at home on their computers and try to manufacture outrage or find ways to get upset about things? Jesus freak
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 21, 2019, 10:26:26 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/justaddwine_/status/1087396564027482113

Disgusting

These kids are a disgrace.  No one respects the two-point jumper anymore.  Steph Curry is corrupting our youth. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 22, 2019, 12:40:47 PM
Covington Catholic has been closed until its “safe to return”

The tolerant Left strikes again
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on January 22, 2019, 01:23:41 PM
Do these people sit at home on their computers and try to manufacture outrage or find ways to get upset about things? Jesus freak

"Pretending to be outraged" is the most popular hobby of Americans, lib-tard or Trump-cuck, especially on Twitter and Facebook.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2019, 01:25:05 PM
Covington Catholic has been closed until its “safe to return”

The tolerant Left strikes again

What has "the tolerant left" done to cause this? Have there been specific threats, or is the school just sticking its head below the parapet until some other poopchute steps up to take their turn in the limelight?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 22, 2019, 01:30:15 PM
retards on twitter saying those kids should get fucked up. idk why they closed other than to righteously say they closed, but here we are
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on January 22, 2019, 02:02:02 PM
What has "the tolerant left" done to cause this? Have there been specific threats, or is the school just sticking its head below the parapet until some other poopchute steps up to take their turn in the limelight?

A ton of journalists and verified people on twitter calling for actions against these kids, and you don't think some people would follow the lead and make death/bomb threats against the school?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2019, 02:06:51 PM
A ton of journalists and verified people on twitter calling for actions against these kids, and you don't think some people would follow the lead and make death/bomb threats against the school?

I don't know. That's why I asked the question as to whether there had been specific threats.

If we're taking preventative actions over empty threats being made on Twitter then there's a missive most days from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue that should be causing concern.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on January 22, 2019, 02:19:23 PM
I don't know. That's why I asked the question as to whether there had been specific threats.

If we're taking preventative actions over empty threats being made on Twitter then there's a missive most days from 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue that should be causing concern.

Nothing publicly as far as I can tell. But it wouldn't be surprising in the slightest if there were.

But "the tolerant left" or whatever in effect caused the school to close because of how the incident was treated this weekend, even if there weren't any specific threats.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2019, 02:50:27 PM
Nothing publicly as far as I can tell. But it wouldn't be surprising in the slightest if there were.

But "the tolerant left" or whatever in effect caused the school to close because of how the incident was treated this weekend, even if there weren't any specific threats.

Did it? I think that's a bit of a leap. I think that a bunch of white teenage boys from a private Catholic school wearing MAGA hats and protesting against abortion are going to be a lightning rod for trouble and I think they're fully cognisant and welcoming of that. The images of them wearing blackface at school basketball games and the allegations of their accompanying behaviour don't tend to make me very sympathetic.

I suspect that the school isn't closed for reasons of safety, but because they're in PR damage control mode.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on January 22, 2019, 03:06:15 PM
Did it? I think that's a bit of a leap. I think that a bunch of white teenage boys from a private Catholic school wearing MAGA hats and protesting against abortion are going to be a lightning rod for trouble and I think they're fully cognisant and welcoming of that. The images of them wearing blackface at school basketball games and the allegations of their accompanying behaviour don't tend to make me very sympathetic.

I suspect that the school isn't closed for reasons of safety, but because they're in PR damage control mode.

I mean that's quite possibly the reason the school is closed, but the fact they have to be closed in the first place is ridiculous.

Comparing what this group of goddamn teenagers did to the reaction of everyone is ridiculous. Two people from the same school at an three years ago, ergo likely unrelated to anyone in this entire fiasco, painting their entire body black for a blackout basketball game isn't blackface imo, but even if it was, I don't see how that changes anything about the people involved in this event. They weren't even protesting against abortion at the time this whole thing happened. If wearing a stupid hat and having stupid political beliefs is enough to justify everything that's happened to these kids I think that's pretty freaking sad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2019, 03:13:32 PM
I mean that's quite possibly the reason the school is closed, but the fact they have to be closed in the first place is ridiculous.

Which is my point, I'm not sure they have to be. They're choosing to be. I don't know that we should be granting them martyrdom for doing so, no one is going to throw a molotov through their windows.

Quote
Comparing what this group of goddamn teenagers did to the reaction of everyone is ridiculous. Two people from the same school at an three years ago, ergo likely unrelated to anyone in this entire fiasco, painting their entire body black for a blackout basketball game isn't blackface imo, but even if it was, I don't see how that changes anything about the people involved in this event. They weren't even protesting against abortion at the time this whole thing happened. If wearing a stupid hat and having stupid political beliefs is enough to justify everything that's happened to these kids I think that's pretty freaking sad.

I don't actually know what has happened to these kids. One of them got his face plastered across social media, but again, you go for a march down The Mall in support of a divisive and emotional issue while wearing a MAGA hat, I'd put it to you that you're not really in a position to complain when someone notices you. That's kind of the point in the first place, is it not?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 22, 2019, 05:43:38 PM
Did it? I think that's a bit of a leap. I think that a bunch of white teenage boys from a private Catholic school wearing MAGA hats and protesting against abortion are going to be a lightning rod for trouble and I think they're fully cognisant and welcoming of that. The images of them wearing blackface at school basketball games and the allegations of their accompanying behaviour don't tend to make me very sympathetic.

I suspect that the school isn't closed for reasons of safety, but because they're in PR damage control mode.

From Kaepernick and the right to protest, (on company time mind you) to actually placing culpability on teenagers who were being screamed at and yelled racial and homophobic slurs by the black version of the WBC when kids decide to peacefully protest on their own saturday.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 22, 2019, 05:47:17 PM
I mean that's quite possibly the reason the school is closed, but the fact they have to be closed in the first place is ridiculous.

Comparing what this group of goddamn teenagers did to the reaction of everyone is ridiculous. Two people from the same school at an three years ago, ergo likely unrelated to anyone in this entire fiasco, painting their entire body black for a blackout basketball game isn't blackface imo, but even if it was, I don't see how that changes anything about the people involved in this event. They weren't even protesting against abortion at the time this whole thing happened. If wearing a stupid hat and having stupid political beliefs is enough to justify everything that's happened to these kids I think that's pretty freaking sad.

Let me tell you exactly what it is. A shitty and pathetic cop out.

Since the story about the kid at the protest isn't what people made it out to be, someone actually went digging through this schools history and posted this to somehow be vindicated and justify just the lying and the horrible treatment these kids have received. Because a kid was in the wrong place at the wrong time and wearing a MAGA hat, this somehow justifies a giant moral crusade involving digging through the schools history looking for anything that is not politically correct or even slightly racist.

Worse yet, there's clear video at this point that shows Phillips to be the lying sack of excrement that he is, but some are such slaves to identity or their political narrative, that in the case of "native american protestor vs. white pro-choice kid in a MAGA hat" they cannot comprehend, even with video to the contrary mind you, that the kid could be in the right.  It's freaking insane.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 25, 2019, 08:39:28 AM
"Hi, I'd like a standard.......make it a double."

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/media-must-learn-covington-catholic-story/581035/

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 25, 2019, 09:10:03 AM
"Hi, I'd like a standard.......make it a double."

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/01/media-must-learn-covington-catholic-story/581035/



The media is the actual victim here!!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on January 25, 2019, 11:02:31 AM
That read like a fuckin satire piece
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 25, 2019, 09:18:49 PM
Let me tell you exactly what it is. A shitty and pathetic cop out.

Since the story about the kid at the protest isn't what people made it out to be, someone actually went digging through this schools history and posted this to somehow be vindicated and justify just the lying and the horrible treatment these kids have received. Because a kid was in the wrong place at the wrong time and wearing a MAGA hat, this somehow justifies a giant moral crusade involving digging through the schools history looking for anything that is not politically correct or even slightly racist.

Worse yet, there's clear video at this point that shows Phillips to be the lying sack of excrement that he is, but some are such slaves to identity or their political narrative, that in the case of "native american protestor vs. white pro-choice kid in a MAGA hat" they cannot comprehend, even with video to the contrary mind you, that the kid could be in the right.  It's freaking insane.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190126/5b8784c3e837f71945b0e1a11ee89362.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 25, 2019, 09:58:41 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190126/5b8784c3e837f71945b0e1a11ee89362.jpg)

Ironic considering as I said, people combed the history of this school to find anything, no matter what the year or who was involved to bring down those MAGA teens!

"THOSE DARN TEENS AND THEIR HATS AND SMUG SMIRKS!" the collective left said while shaking their fists in the air. When did you all become Vernon Wormer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 27, 2019, 09:40:17 PM
https://twitter.com/HowardSchultz/status/1089675490707865603?s=19

https://twitter.com/ryangrim/status/1089689682131202048?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 27, 2019, 09:45:11 PM
Everyone should run for President in 2020.  Everyone.  The Ultimate Meme-ocracy. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 27, 2019, 10:47:47 PM
Deez Nuts 2020
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 31, 2019, 02:33:18 PM
https://twitter.com/adamjohnsonnyc/status/1090904018447224832

lol what is this
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 03, 2019, 01:02:01 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190126/5b8784c3e837f71945b0e1a11ee89362.jpg)

https://www.youtube.com/embed/lSkpPaiUF8s

Nathan Phillips is a freaking liar
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 04, 2019, 12:13:37 PM
Ralph Northam-the gift that keeps on giving.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 04, 2019, 08:17:19 PM
Ralph Northam-the gift that keeps on giving.
.
on-deck Justin Fairfax 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 04, 2019, 09:32:49 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/04/us/politics/justin-fairfax-sexual-assault.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 04, 2019, 10:38:52 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/04/us/politics/justin-fairfax-sexual-assault.html

LMAOOOO.

By the way, I just saw the clip of Northam refusing to shake the hand of his black opponent after a debate.

Look, I still don't know whats in the guys mind and heart (though that picture is freaking absurd), but a move like that is one that a giant shitbag makes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 05, 2019, 05:18:05 PM
Quote
NEWS: A California woman accusing Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax of sexual assault has hired Christine Blasey Ford’s legal team - Katz, Marshall and Banks - and is consulting with them about next steps, according to a source close to the legal team.

#BelieveWomen
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 05, 2019, 07:26:20 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/amyegardner/status/1092941590555971585

She’s done before she even started
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on February 05, 2019, 08:35:19 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/amyegardner/status/1092941590555971585

She’s done before she even started

Oh I didn't realize she was claiming Cherokee as her primary race, I thought she just said she's part Cherokee.  Hahaha that's great. 

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 06, 2019, 06:53:30 AM
I freaking despise Ann Coulter.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 06, 2019, 11:15:32 AM
@shaunking: BREAKING: The Attorney General of Virginia, Mark Herring, 3rd in succession to become Governor, just announced that he also donned blackface as a college student as well.

Yeah. I'm serious.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 06, 2019, 11:19:24 AM
@michaelavenatti: I am proposing a new rule for discussion, debate and God willing, adoption. “No individual who previously appeared in black face shall seek elective office or reelection in the United States, especially as a Democrat.”

Thank you in advance for your consideration.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 06, 2019, 11:22:06 AM
Quote
It is no longer possible for Governor Northam to lead our Commonwealth and it is time for him to step down


-Mark Herring, like 3 days ago
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 06, 2019, 11:34:41 AM
Quote
NBC News has learned that Virginia Lt. Gov. Justin Fairfax used profane language in a private meeting Monday night, while referring to his accuser, Dr. Vanessa Tyson.

Two sources tells us Fairfax said of Tyson: “freak that bitch.”

   — @GeoffRBennett & @jonallendc

This state is wild
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 06, 2019, 08:19:24 PM
Quote
NEW: Virginia Democratic Congressman Bobby Scott was made aware of allegations of sexual assault against now-Lieutenant Governor Justin Fairfax over a year ago by the alleged victim herself, @ABC News has learned
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 07, 2019, 10:14:52 AM
Anyone who even tacitly supported AOC should have their nose rubbed in this freaking absolute abomination of a "Green New Deal" I'm reading and be yelled at, like a dog who just soiled the carpet.

NOTE: Only dick dog owners do that, I never would.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 07, 2019, 01:19:43 PM
Anyone who even tacitly supported AOC should have their nose rubbed in this freaking absolute abomination of a "Green New Deal" I'm reading and be yelled at, like a dog who just soiled the carpet.

NOTE: Only dick dog owners do that, I never would.

Sorry, what about this proposal are you triggered about?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 07, 2019, 01:29:47 PM
Sorry, what about this proposal are you triggered about?

Lol Jesus Christ man.

I don't know where you want me to start. The absurd notion that we'll reduce air travel so significantly, the absolutely absurd notion of, "economic security for those who are unable or unwilling to work" the guarantee of a job for all.

This is the stuff of people with the worldview of a freaking five year old. A GUARANTEED JOB FOR ALL! ECONOMIC SECURITY FOR THOSE WHO ARE UNWILLING TO WORK!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 07, 2019, 01:35:30 PM
Sorry, what about this proposal are you triggered about?

I thought everyone had figured that it was best to leave those two to their right wing circlejerk? They're not doing anyone any harm as they whip themselves into a giddy little ball of hypocritical excitement, but responding just gives them something to work with. Think of it like feeding gremlins after midnight.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 07, 2019, 01:39:30 PM
I thought everyone had figured that it was best to leave those two to their right wing circlejerk? They're not doing anyone any harm as they whip themselves into a giddy little ball of hypocritical excitement, but responding just gives them something to work with. Think of it like feeding gremlins after midnight.

As opposed to letting about four people participate in their usual left-wing circle jerk?

It's not my problem in the last 72 hours we've learned every democratic official in West Virginia is either racist or has serious unreconciled issues with women that may have resulted in flat out criminal behavior, that Lieawatha's bar app was exposed, both exposing her and WaPo's "fact-checkers" (as if we needed anything else to expose these so called "Fact-checkers" of corporate media after their idiocy during the SOTU), and that the left's new great Spanish hope has unequivocally revealed herself to be a freaking idiot. Jemele Hill's out here calling for assassinations.

Bonus points for a sitting NY congresswomen essentially telling a high schooler (admittedly an annoying one) that he should, "be scared of us."

Also, the idea that SixFeet is right-wing from what I've seen is pretty silly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 07, 2019, 02:09:56 PM
I thought everyone had figured that it was best to leave those two to their right wing circlejerk? They're not doing anyone any harm as they whip themselves into a giddy little ball of hypocritical excitement, but responding just gives them something to work with. Think of it like feeding gremlins after midnight.

Lol, if you can’t find humor in the Warren or Virginia stories, then get a new life
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 07, 2019, 02:11:15 PM
Lol, if you can’t find humor in the Warren or Virginia stories, then get a new life

Generally I'm fairly offended by racist and misogynistic shitbags regardless of their political stripes, but it appears that your primary enjoyment of such things comes from one side of the house.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 07, 2019, 02:36:48 PM
https://twitter.com/logandobson/status/1093575524503441410?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 07, 2019, 02:38:10 PM
Generally I'm fairly offended by racist and misogynistic shitbags regardless of their political stripes, but it appears that your primary enjoyment of such things comes from one side of the house.

Yeah because they’re the ones lecturing everyone else and acting like they’re incapable of racism or misogyny. The rampant hypocrisy is funny to me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 07, 2019, 02:44:03 PM
Yeah because they’re the ones lecturing everyone else and acting like they’re incapable of racism or misogyny. The rampant hypocrisy is funny to me.

So a couple of bad eggs amongst an organisation that calls out such behaviour is a worse thing than an organisation that at best just ignores it, and in some parts actually uses such attitudes to their advantage? That's a curious perspective on the world, but you do you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 07, 2019, 02:45:02 PM
Lol Jesus Christ man.

I don't know where you want me to start. The absurd notion that we'll reduce air travel so significantly, the absolutely absurd notion of, "economic security for those who are unable or unwilling to work" the guarantee of a job for all.

This is the stuff of people with the worldview of a freaking five year old. A GUARANTEED JOB FOR ALL! ECONOMIC SECURITY FOR THOSE WHO ARE UNWILLING TO WORK!

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.

It's pretty clear you are reacting to headlines from a few publications you follow rather than taking a few minutes to read the proposal.  The actual document says none of what you're up in arms about. 

1.  The central goal is for the U.S. to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. Specifically because they dont think they can have that much of an effect on livestock and aviation pollution.

2.  Nowhere in the document does it talk about people who are unwilling or unable to work should get economic security. 

It does however list a goal to create fair paying union jobs in the green and renewable energy industry that guarantee benefits, salaries, and time off.  Things that good paying jobs should have.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 07, 2019, 02:49:17 PM
Yeah because they’re the ones lecturing everyone else and acting like they’re incapable of racism or misogyny. The rampant hypocrisy is funny to me.

Pretty sure liberals aren't ashamed of calling out excrement of their own party. The liberal media definitely isnt either.  CNN has been all over the blackface case.

 Hypocrisy isn't both sides having bad eggs.  Hypocrisy is both sides not doing anything about their bad eggs...

Liberals aren't defending the things Hillary Clinton may or may not have done (an investigation will uncover this), liberals are asking why this is relevant when she isnt president and the current president is running the gov into the ground? 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 07, 2019, 03:05:28 PM
It's pretty clear you are reacting to headlines from a few publications you follow rather than taking a few minutes to read the proposal.  The actual document says none of what you're up in arms about. 

1.  The central goal is for the U.S. to achieve net-zero greenhouse gas emissions by 2030. Specifically because they dont think they can have that much of an effect on livestock and aviation pollution.

2.  Nowhere in the document does it talk about people who are unwilling or unable to work should get economic security. 

It does however list a goal to create fair paying union jobs in the green and renewable energy industry that guarantee benefits, salaries, and time off.  Things that good paying jobs should have.



1. Net-zero emissions? Ok, we'll all just waive goodbye to air travel.  But hey, those millions of jobs lost when we eliminate coal and nuclear energy as well as aviation get to automatically have other guaranteed jobs because the government will make sure of it.

2. Please read the associated FAQ to this document, which is so pathetic I'd think it was a parody if NPR didn't have the same document readily available. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5729035/Green-New-Deal-FAQ.pdf?platform=hootsuite

3. Solyndra says hi!

EDIT: They actually took the FAQ down! Ahahahahahahaha.

 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 07, 2019, 03:10:55 PM
I actually hope all of them die.

This held up REAL well.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 07, 2019, 03:24:04 PM
So a couple of bad eggs amongst an organisation that calls out such behaviour is a worse thing than an organisation that at best just ignores it, and in some parts actually uses such attitudes to their advantage? That's a curious perspective on the world, but you do you.

Your use of the term “bad egg” furthers the insinuation that Democrats by nature have no character flaws and conservatives are all racists and rapists. These are politicians we are talking about, most of them are scumbags or idiots regardless of party. Choosing affilitation to the Democratic Party doesn’t automatically make you a good person
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 07, 2019, 03:24:47 PM
1. Net-zero emissions? Ok, we'll all just waive goodbye to air travel.  But hey, those millions of jobs lost when we eliminate coal and nuclear energy as well as aviation get to automatically have other guaranteed jobs because the government will make sure of it.

2. Please read the associated FAQ to this document, which is so pathetic I'd think it was a parody if NPR didn't have the same document readily available. https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/5729035/Green-New-Deal-FAQ.pdf?platform=hootsuite

3. Solyndra says hi!

EDIT: They actually took the FAQ down! Ahahahahahahaha.

1a.  I'm not following.  No one is touching air travel
1b.  Where are you getting a million jobs from?  Census data shows less the 75k work in the coal industry and it looks like at max 70,000 work at nuclear reaction plants.

2.  Cant comment if its pulled down
3.  Nice call out on Solyndra, but ignore everything else those loans and grants have done for this country.  You know Tesla was funded under the same loans, as well as Ford and their eco drive engine.  You know private banks saw the value in these publicly funded loans and started offering similar loans themselves.  That 5 billion given by Obama, which was slightly above the 4.6 billion bush gave, is responsible for the exponential growth in solar power, wind power, and electric cars in this country.  Although saving 75k high paying g coal jobs is probably a more sustainable and cleaner option. 

I k ow you probably wont read it, but here's a report on some of the short term results Obama's work on clean and renewable energy has done for this country. 

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2017/06/29/435281/americas-clean-energy-success-numbers
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 07, 2019, 03:26:38 PM
Quote
How will you pay for it?

At the end of the day, this is an investment in our economy that should grow our wealth as a nation, so the question isn’t how will we pay for it, but what will we do with our new shared prosperity.


Narrator: There was no plan to pay for it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 07, 2019, 03:33:38 PM
Your use of the term “bad egg” furthers the insinuation that Democrats by nature have no character flaws and conservatives are all racists and rapists. These are politicians we are talking about, most of them are scumbags or idiots regardless of party. Choosing affilitation to the Democratic Party doesn’t automatically make you a good person

That's a really weird interpretation of what I wrote, if you're going to use straw man arguments then go practice on your own somewhere quiet before doing it in public.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 07, 2019, 03:46:25 PM
That's a really weird interpretation of what I wrote, if you're going to use straw man arguments then go practice on your own somewhere quiet before doing it in public.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/russia-s-propaganda-machine-discovers-2020-democratic-candidate-tulsi-gabbard-n964261
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 07, 2019, 03:52:57 PM
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2020-election/russia-s-propaganda-machine-discovers-2020-democratic-candidate-tulsi-gabbard-n964261

What does that have to do with anything being discussed? You're all over the shop here and making no sense.

You're doing a very good impression of one of those "I don't support any particular side of the political spectrum, I just really really enjoy putting the boot in on that one specifically" types.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 07, 2019, 03:57:11 PM
Narrator: There was no plan to pay for it.

It's unbelievable.

1a.  I'm not following.  No one is touching air travel
1b.  Where are you getting a million jobs from?  Census data shows less the 75k work in the coal industry and it looks like at max 70,000 work at nuclear reaction plants.

2.  Cant comment if its pulled down
3.  Nice call out on Solyndra, but ignore everything else those loans and grants have done for this country.  You know Tesla was funded under the same loans, as well as Ford and their eco drive engine.  You know private banks saw the value in these publicly funded loans and started offering similar loans themselves.  That 5 billion given by Obama, which was slightly above the 4.6 billion bush gave, is responsible for the exponential growth in solar power, wind power, and electric cars in this country.  Although saving 75k high paying g coal jobs is probably a more sustainable and cleaner option. 

I k ow you probably wont read it, but here's a report on some of the short term results Obama's work on clean and renewable energy has done for this country. 

https://www.americanprogress.org/issues/green/reports/2017/06/29/435281/americas-clean-energy-success-numbers

I'm going to be naturally dismissive when your source material is headed up by freaking NEERA TANDEEN.

I mean, imagine if I tried to bolster my thoughts around here with a think-tank headed by Mitch Mulvaney.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 07, 2019, 04:05:29 PM
What does that have to do with anything being discussed?

Russia has to do with EVERYTHING being discussed
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 07, 2019, 04:10:44 PM
Russia has to do with EVERYTHING being discussed
Find a new slant
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 07, 2019, 04:21:13 PM
It's unbelievable.

I'm going to be naturally dismissive when your source material is headed up by freaking NEERA TANDEEN.

I mean, imagine if I tried to bolster my thoughts around here with a think-tank headed by Mitch Mulvaney.

How about the rest of my points and the fact that the report has 53 citations from government websites...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 07, 2019, 04:22:12 PM
Narrator: There was no plan to pay for it.

So do you have an issue with what they want to do or how they plan to pay for it. Those are two different issues.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 07, 2019, 07:54:13 PM
So do you have an issue with what they want to do or how they plan to pay for it. Those are two different issues.
People usually hide the former behind a façade of the latter.

"hOw ArE yOu GoNnA pAy fOr iT"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on February 07, 2019, 10:34:42 PM
So do you have an issue with what they want to do or how they plan to pay for it. Those are two different issues.

Well they have no stated way to pay for it, and keep saying that "it doesn't matter how we pay for it because it's important and will create wealth" without any justification thereof. Except for through Fed-backed inflation, again, which is a dangerous idea.

They also want to do incredibly dumb things such as:
1.) Get rid of nuclear energy in a decade. The most stupid thing so-called environmentalists continue to advocate for that only makes it harder to be energy efficient. It might be possible, but at the rate of progress of energy it seems incredibly unlikely that it would be wise to get rid of it in that short of a time period.
2.) Cap and trade or carbon tax, justifying it because "it's a small part of the deal" while ignoring any adverse impacts.
3.) Guarantee everyone a unionized government job and job training. No idea what those jobs could possibly be and they don't even attempt to provide any examples besides that they'll be Green New Deal jobs, which doesn't mean anything. Maybe they'll pay some people to dig holes and some people to fill in holes. Besides that snark, guaranteed jobs programs don't work long-term.
4.) Continuing and increasing subsidization of whatever clean energy program the government likes. This perverts market incentives and allows for failing projects to continue existing for no real reason.

I've got other issues with the GND but that's the core of it.

Basically, they want to spend a fuckton of money on their pet projects while continually dismissing anyone who questions how they might pay for it with our already incredibly overbloated government budget.

The FAQ is back up here, by the way: https://www.atr.org/sites/default/files/assets/greennewdeal.pdf
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 07, 2019, 11:08:31 PM
Wondering how many people got excited to hear about the “unwilling to work” but paid anyway bit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 08, 2019, 09:43:30 AM
People usually hide the former behind a façade of the latter.

"hOw ArE yOu GoNnA pAy fOr iT"

Exactly my point
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 08, 2019, 09:52:35 AM
Exactly my point
To be fair that’s a very legitimate question.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 08, 2019, 09:55:49 AM
Well they have no stated way to pay for it, and keep saying that "it doesn't matter how we pay for it because it's important and will create wealth" without any justification thereof. Except for through Fed-backed inflation, again, which is a dangerous idea.

They also want to do incredibly dumb things such as:
1.) Get rid of nuclear energy in a decade. The most stupid thing so-called environmentalists continue to advocate for that only makes it harder to be energy efficient. It might be possible, but at the rate of progress of energy it seems incredibly unlikely that it would be wise to get rid of it in that short of a time period.
2.) Cap and trade or carbon tax, justifying it because "it's a small part of the deal" while ignoring any adverse impacts.
3.) Guarantee everyone a unionized government job and job training. No idea what those jobs could possibly be and they don't even attempt to provide any examples besides that they'll be Green New Deal jobs, which doesn't mean anything. Maybe they'll pay some people to dig holes and some people to fill in holes. Besides that snark, guaranteed jobs programs don't work long-term.
4.) Continuing and increasing subsidization of whatever clean energy program the government likes. This perverts market incentives and allows for failing projects to continue existing for no real reason.

I've got other issues with the GND but that's the core of it.

Basically, they want to spend a fuckton of money on their pet projects while continually dismissing anyone who questions how they might pay for it with our already incredibly overbloated government budget.

The FAQ is back up here, by the way: https://www.atr.org/sites/default/files/assets/greennewdeal.pdf

So, I'll start this off by saying I'm not even necessarily for gnd.  I do think that we should be investing more in renewables for two reasons. 

1.  We need to counteract global warming yesterday
2.  We need to create an industry which can bring in new jobs.  This can do that.

Regarding the GND, I don't get why they want to move away from nuclear.  I also get that there are cobra effects to carbon taxes, but I do think it's the right way to go at least for the time being (was this part of the GND?). 

The reason why I asked my questions about if you (not you specifically) are against what the GND is trying to accomplish or how they plan to pay for it is because the GND, as I understand it, is not supposed to provide the how it gets done, it's supposed to provide the what are we trying to accomplish and why we are trying to accomplish it. 
The government cant, and shouldn't move to the why until they have agreement that things need to change.  Case in point, Trump has brought coal to the global clean energy summit as a solution to climate change and has been laughed at each time by the world.

In my eyes the GND at least gives a starting point for discussion.  Which I think is needed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 08, 2019, 09:57:27 AM
I promise I'm not an AOC stan, but everyone needs to watch this.  This is what government should be about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AljakpXAh7c
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on February 08, 2019, 01:49:55 PM
So, I'll start this off by saying I'm not even necessarily for gnd.  I do think that we should be investing more in renewables for two reasons. 

1.  We need to counteract global warming yesterday
2.  We need to create an industry which can bring in new jobs.  This can do that.

Regarding the GND, I don't get why they want to move away from nuclear.  I also get that there are cobra effects to carbon taxes, but I do think it's the right way to go at least for the time being (was this part of the GND?). 

The reason why I asked my questions about if you (not you specifically) are against what the GND is trying to accomplish or how they plan to pay for it is because the GND, as I understand it, is not supposed to provide the how it gets done, it's supposed to provide the what are we trying to accomplish and why we are trying to accomplish it. 
The government cant, and shouldn't move to the why until they have agreement that things need to change.  Case in point, Trump has brought coal to the global clean energy summit as a solution to climate change and has been laughed at each time by the world.

In my eyes the GND at least gives a starting point for discussion.  Which I think is needed.

If the GND is all about solving climate change, why is there a guaranteed jobs and income program involved? It's a very disingenuous way to """start a discussion.""" AOC threw all these ideas out there without a stated way to fund any of it and still somehow got support from a lot of major Dems, including all the senators running for prez. I am pretty concerned that politicians now can fund their pet projects through the lens of climate change whether that would actually help the problem or not - case in point, wanting to move away from nuclear in support of other programs the base finds more palatable. That actually hurts the problem, but boy oh boy do they care, and that's what's important.

Cap and trade and carbon taxes are explicitly talked about in the FAQ I linked in my other post.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 08, 2019, 01:54:54 PM
I promise I'm not an AOC stan, but everyone needs to watch this.  This is what government should be about.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AljakpXAh7c

AOC was broke before/after being elected this past fall. Let’s check back in on her net worth in a few years.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 08, 2019, 02:00:05 PM
“Retrofit every building in America”

Who wrote this stuff? Anyone with a tiny shred of business/operations knowledge knows how wildly unrealistic this is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 08, 2019, 03:21:27 PM
“Retrofit every building in America”

Who wrote this stuff? Anyone with a tiny shred of business/operations knowledge knows how wildly unrealistic this is.

BuT hOw aRe wE gOiNg To PaY fOr iT.

Imagine asking that question like it doesn't matter.

Hahahawhatthefuckiseconomicshahahajustprintmoneyyyy

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 08, 2019, 06:03:56 PM
If the GND is all about solving climate change, why is there a guaranteed jobs and income program involved? It's a very disingenuous way to """start a discussion."""
There isnt any mention of that in the deal
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 08, 2019, 06:06:27 PM
AOC was broke before/after being elected this past fall. Let’s check back in on her net worth in a few years.
Jesus christ you guys are the worst.  Your response to doing something good is, "well let's see if she's still not corrupt at the end of the year"
How about we applaud someone who cares about getting limiting corruption for both parties?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 08, 2019, 06:08:25 PM
“Retrofit every building in America”

Who wrote this stuff? Anyone with a tiny shred of business/operations knowledge knows how wildly unrealistic this is.
Every building should be updated to improve carbon emissions.  It is a goal to work towards.  It probably wont happen
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 08, 2019, 06:12:38 PM
BuT hOw aRe wE gOiNg To PaY fOr iT.

Imagine asking that question like it doesn't matter.

Hahahawhatthefuckiseconomicshahahajustprintmoneyyyy
Again the goal of this deal is to get people to agree that climate change is real and there is a need for more reliability on renewable resources and clean energy.

You my notice that there isnt any plan for how much money is needed to pay for this because that's not the point of the deal.  That needs to get negotiated across the aisle with priorities of each party.

I dont know what you do for work, but large businesses dont just pitch internal goals with a lost of how each goal is going to be accomplished.  You pitch the goal to your team then you figure out how to do it and adjust the goal based on feasibility.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on February 08, 2019, 06:35:20 PM
There isnt any mention of that in the deal

Why do you keep saying things aren't mentioned in the deal when they clearly are?

https://www.atr.org/sites/default/files/assets/greennewdeal.pdf

It's on the first and last pages and continually brought up throughout this document

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 08, 2019, 07:33:38 PM
“Retrofit every building in America”

Who wrote this stuff? Anyone with a tiny shred of business/operations knowledge knows how wildly unrealistic this is.

"Re-design, re-build or replace every single piece of software ever created, and do it in the next five years." An impossible project requiring vast expenditure of time and resources which would almost certainly bankrupt entire industries. But we did it and it played a significant part in creating huge amounts of wealth and success.

Infrastructure investment is a hugely valuable exercise. You saying "anyone with a tiny shred of business/operations knowledge knows how wildly unrealistic this is" demonstrates your lack thereof. Enforced change is a catalyst for innovation and re-invention.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 08, 2019, 08:55:09 PM
To be fair that’s a very legitimate question.
Nobody asked it when we passed a gargantuan tax cut or increased the military budget. It's actually not a legitimate question, it's a rhetorical tool for arguing against policy.

The military budget increase alone cost more than making every public university tuition free.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 08, 2019, 08:58:34 PM
AOC was broke before/after being elected this past fall. Let’s check back in on her net worth in a few years.
frrrrrt
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 08, 2019, 09:00:39 PM


“Retrofit every building in America”

Who wrote this stuff? Anyone with a tiny shred of business/operations knowledge knows how wildly unrealistic this is.

Haha dumbasses

Imagine bringing electricity to EVERY building in the country

What the freak you want us to remove lead paint and asbestos from everywhere? MIGHT AS WELL ASK US TO PUT UNICORNS ON THE MOON

Some people just have no grasp on reality
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 08, 2019, 09:12:16 PM
frrrrrt

Save that post for when she’s part of the 1%. Shouldn’t be long
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 08, 2019, 09:18:12 PM

Haha dumbasses

Imagine bringing electricity to EVERY building in the country

What the freak you want us to remove lead paint and asbestos from everywhere? MIGHT AS WELL ASK US TO PUT UNICORNS ON THE MOON

Some people just have no grasp on reality

Did you have even the slightest clue about what she means by that or what it would cost? No jokes, anecdotes, or rebuttals, just answer the question in plain English.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 08, 2019, 09:34:45 PM
Did you have even the slightest clue about what she means by that or what it would cost? No jokes, anecdotes, or rebuttals, just answer the question in plain English.
Yes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 08, 2019, 09:35:42 PM
*skimming Lil Ben Shapiro's twitter so I can read mj's next post in advance*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 08, 2019, 11:11:33 PM
Why do you keep saying things aren't mentioned in the deal when they clearly are?

https://www.atr.org/sites/default/files/assets/greennewdeal.pdf

It's on the first and last pages and continually brought up throughout this document
The document doesnt say that agreeing with this guarantees everyone gets a guaranteed job.  It says we want to create jobs that guarantee that standard of life.  There is a huge difference.

It even relates the goal to FDR's plan.  FDR never made any deals, plans, or Bill's that guaranteed every american gets a job that provides a livable wage.  He did work so those types of jobs could be created though...

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 09, 2019, 05:39:04 AM
Quote
@AOC: Last year DHS separated 1000s of children from their parents + put them in cages. Some died. Yet DHS has had 0 accountability or changes.

Why on earth should we give them more cash?

Proud to join @AyannaPressley, @IlhanMN, & @RashidaTlaib as we say #Not1Dollar more to DHS.

Departments under DHS:

-ICE
-CBP
-TSA
-Secret Service
-FEMA
-USCIS
-US Coast Guard
-Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)
-Federal Law Enforcement Training Center


https://www.dhs.gov/operational-and-support-components

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 09, 2019, 09:20:29 AM
Nobody asked it when we passed a gargantuan tax cut or increased the military budget. It's actually not a legitimate question, it's a rhetorical tool for arguing against policy.

The military budget increase alone cost more than making every public university tuition free.
You didn’t answer the question. Newsflash: you can’t just cut the military budget in half like it’s cancelling Netflix. I would expand on this but JE will ban me so I won’t
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 09, 2019, 10:26:03 PM
Departments under DHS:

-ICE
-CBP
-TSA
-Secret Service
-FEMA
-USCIS
-US Coast Guard
-Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)
-Federal Law Enforcement Training Center


https://www.dhs.gov/operational-and-support-components

Am I allowed to agree with some of her views as f'n d disagree with others?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 10, 2019, 12:04:38 AM
https://mobile.twitter.com/jstein_wapo/status/1094238690782646272

What is this?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on February 10, 2019, 04:00:02 AM
i like how mj has not answered a single question he has been presented with.

i also enjoy how hes going to either reply to them or blow this off the same way.

hes become a caricature
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 10, 2019, 12:30:29 PM
Nobody asked it when we passed a gargantuan tax cut or increased the military budget. It's actually not a legitimate question, it's a rhetorical tool for arguing against policy.

The military budget increase alone cost more than making every public university tuition free.


"How are we going to pay for it" is now illegitimate. FFS.

I'm sorry I don't support gutting our military to essentially create four years of extra high school. I'm not subsidizing the next wave of democratic voters and their useless sociology degrees, even if I agree that our military budget could be paired down by not playing world police.

*skimming Lil Ben Shapiro's twitter so I can read mj's next post in advance*

Hahahahaha thats cute considering literally all your talking points come from the derriere end of leftist media. Go ahead, give me the next take from the worst parts of The Atlantic (fresh off employing assassination-advocating Jemele Hill!) or TheIntercept.

Go wish another mass shooting on kids for the high crime of wearing a hat and smirking, it's pretty much all your good for. Aside from saying that cost is an illegitimate question. JUSTPRINTMONEYHAHAHAHAHA.

i like how mj has not answered a single question he has been presented with.

i also enjoy how hes going to either reply to them or blow this off the same way.

hes become a caricature

What questions? Show me them? Insanity posed one question which indicated to me that he didn't bother reading the legislation or associated FAQ. His further commentary cemented my opinion. But at the very least he approached the thread with a substantive take. The next point you make will be the first.

Like I'd ever blow off an attempt by someone like you to try to condescend to someone like me. If you're wondering what that means, it means I think you're a freaking moron. And after your little ad hominem I have no problem calling you a douchebag either.

A caricature. Lol, freak you. Go back a couple of pages and see wishes about the death of teenagers before you freaking come at me, you stupid freak. 

Simply put, especially after this legislation, anyone who puts any stock into this horseface just isn't to be taken seriously.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 10, 2019, 10:24:25 PM
Departments under DHS:

-ICE
-CBP
-TSA
-Secret Service
-FEMA
-USCIS
-US Coast Guard
-Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA)
-Federal Law Enforcement Training Center


https://www.dhs.gov/operational-and-support-components
Yeah, freak most of those

But if you feel so strongly about this you must have been incredibly upset when they shut down the government and stopped funding some of those agencies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 10, 2019, 10:25:38 PM
Found mj's new source of info(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190211/d91af449c560604ccf14250c5791a502.jpg)

I don't read The Atlantic btw
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 11, 2019, 10:01:59 AM
Yeah, freak most of those

But if you feel so strongly about this you must have been incredibly upset when they shut down the government and stopped funding some of those agencies.


Yeah, I actually do feel strongly about this because I have deep family ties to 2 of those organizations. So no, I don’t feel the same way as you, and I don’t think I would otherwise.  My parents actually were affected by the government shutdown, so maybe check yourself before projecting my beliefs and opinions for me again.

Hmm, I must have missed all of the times I supported Trumps brilliant decision making and policies. Either you were being facietious or you don’t pay attention to everything I say if you think that I thought this stunt of a shutdown that was doomed to fail from the start for a wall he said Mexico would pay for was a good idea
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 11, 2019, 05:19:54 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/jstein_wapo/status/1094238690782646272

What is this?

I'm confused is the FAQ sheet correct or not.  On one hand the sources are reputable, on the other hand the actual bill doesn't say half the stuff the FAQ doc says.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 11, 2019, 07:51:48 PM
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-usa-shutdown-deal-shelby/u-s-senator-shelby-says-agreement-in-principle-reached-on-border-security-idUSKCN1Q105L

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 17, 2019, 07:32:27 PM
I hope Jussie Smollett gets derriere cancer!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 19, 2019, 06:47:30 PM
He's running

In b4 Stalinzuela
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 19, 2019, 07:42:06 PM
CHICAGO (CBS) — The two brothers involved in the Jussie Smollett attack told police that Smollett was behind creating a racist letter that was sent to the actor on the set of his show, “Empire,” according to two sources with first-hand knowledge of the investigation.

And when that letter did not get a “bigger reaction,” Smollett orchestrated the attack a week later with the two men–Ola and Abel Osundairo, sources said. Also Tuesday, sources said the two brothers were seen on a ride share video camera before being dropped off near the location of the attack.

Smollett received a letter containing a white powder Jan. 22. The letter was mailed to Chicago’s Cinespace Studios, where the show “Empire” is filmed. The letter prompted a HAZMAT response. CPD says the “white substance” was later determined to be aspirin.

The note was crafted with letters apparently cut out from magazines to form words. The pieced-together message contained racial and homophobic threats directed at Smollett. A magazine is one of the pieces of evidence retrieved from the brother’s home last week during a search conducted by CPD. Investigators also recovered a book of stamps.

Smollett claims two men attacked him in Streeterville early Jan. 29 as he was heading to his apartment. He said they yelled racial and homophobic slurs at him, poured a chemical on him and put a rope around his neck.

Sources say at least one of the brothers bought the rope used in the incident at Smollett’s request. The sources also say the “Empire” actor paid for the rope, which was purchased at the Crafty Beaver Hardware Store in the Ravenswood neighborhood the weekend of Jan. 25.

Sources said one of the brothers held the rope and poured bleach while the other wore a plain red hat and yelled slurs at Smollett.


The sources say the red hat was bought at an Uptown beauty supply store and that the attack was supposed to happen before Jan. 29. The brothers told detectives the three men rehearsed the attack days prior to it happening. Smollett paid the brothers $3,500.

CBS 2 Brad Edwards reports, the State’s Attorney Kim Foxx has recused herself from the case. Acting State’s Attorney for the investigation will now be First Assistant State’s Attorney Joseph Magats.


Lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 19, 2019, 07:42:38 PM
He's running

In b4 Stalinzuela

Inb4 the liberal media and the dnc submarine his campaign
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 19, 2019, 07:58:08 PM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=waZLCueCSnU

Will Bernie build the wall?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 19, 2019, 08:27:37 PM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=waZLCueCSnU

Will Bernie build the wall?
If I say yes, will you vote for him?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 19, 2019, 09:46:53 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6SxjBWJPf78
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 19, 2019, 11:04:19 PM
If I say yes, will you vote for him?

I would vote for Bernie before I ever vote for Trump.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 19, 2019, 11:05:16 PM
^but that would never happen so it’s irrelevant
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 19, 2019, 11:08:25 PM
I had a dream that Trump was president and when I woke up and found out it’s reality I started shaking
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 20, 2019, 11:26:51 AM
Bernie Sanders to the rescue!

Not that the field wasn't already helping, but Bernie entering practically guarantees 8 straight years of Cheeto-in-Chief.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 20, 2019, 12:31:49 PM
I would vote for Bernie before I ever vote for Trump.

Quoted for the next time someone calls SixFeet a right wing crackpot.

freak Bernie. Never have I seen a politician so willingly take it up the derriere after his supporters were effectively disenfranchised.

I'm under no illusions about the GOP, they'd have done the same thing to Trump if they weren't reeling because they literally did it four years ago to Ron Paul. Modifying that shitty super-delegate system was the only positive thing to come out of idiot Romney's run for the Presidency.

Well, that and the MSM's treatment of ole Mitt which definitively proved that as long as someone runs for higher office on the Republican ticket, they are to be branded a racist/misogynist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 21, 2019, 09:41:30 AM
Quote
Chicago police say Jussie Smollett paid the two brothers he staged the hoax with by writing them a check.

Unreal
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 21, 2019, 09:45:48 AM
What kind of a excrement criminal do you have to be to pay for your illegal acts by check?

And why is this story in the politics thread?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 21, 2019, 10:12:50 AM
What kind of a excrement criminal do you have to be to pay for your illegal acts by check?

And why is this story in the politics thread?

You told me you stay out of the politics threads


Lies make Jesus cry.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 21, 2019, 11:40:10 AM
What kind of a excrement criminal do you have to be to pay for your illegal acts by check?

And why is this story in the politics thread?

https://twitter.com/gma/status/1096028974981865472

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 21, 2019, 01:58:51 PM
https://twitter.com/gma/status/1096028974981865472

Lol

Question: who on here had honestly ever heard of this guy prior to this fiasco, much less was aware of his views on Trump? It smells like the world's worst attempt at elevating his profile.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 21, 2019, 06:33:15 PM
Question: who on here had honestly ever heard of this guy prior to this fiasco, much less was aware of his views on Trump? It smells like the world's worst attempt at elevating his profile.
It's actually really useful to see which people got super excited at the possibility he faked the attack
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 21, 2019, 06:33:32 PM
Cursed image(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20190222/cbe8083698f2f598c2a61020dabf6522.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 21, 2019, 10:22:34 PM
Inb4 the liberal media and the dnc submarine his campaign

https://twitter.com/crookedcopmala/status/1098410007463411712
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 21, 2019, 11:00:23 PM
It's actually really useful to see which people got super excited at the possibility he faked the attack

Imagine first denigrating people on the basis of a hoax and then trying to turn said hoax around on them.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 27, 2019, 09:53:08 PM
Imagine first denigrating people on the basis of a hoax and then trying to turn said hoax around on them.
I'm not sure what you mean.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 01, 2019, 11:16:39 PM
https://www.aier.org/article/where-did-aoc-get-her-sweet-potatoes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 01, 2019, 11:23:01 PM
Quote
Representative Alexandria Ocaio-Cortez (D., N.Y.) questioned the morality of bringing children into a world that is struggling to address man-made climate change in a video posted to social media over the weekend.

“There’s scientific consensus that the lives of children are going to be very difficult. And it does lead young people to have a legitimate question: is it okay to still have children?” Ocasio-Cortez told her 2.5 million Instagram followers.

Had no idea she said this, I for one am SHOCKED
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 01, 2019, 11:27:08 PM
https://twitter.com/jerrydunleavy/status/1099908748930416640

This was fun, I’d like to go back to living in America though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on March 02, 2019, 01:26:39 AM
https://twitter.com/jerrydunleavy/status/1099908748930416640

I don't understand why people even try to use knives that dull. I barely understand how you can let a kitchen knife even get that dull unless you've given up on life.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 02, 2019, 08:05:09 AM
Had no idea she said this, I for one am SHOCKED

That young people feel this way?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 02, 2019, 08:30:51 AM
That young people feel this way?

I probably fall into the category of an older millennial (I don’t identify with those fucktards though), but I’m at the age where many of my friends are having kids and I’ve never heard anyone say this. If young people aren’t having kids, it’s usually because they’re single/not married yet/don’t plan on getting married, or don’t want the economic burden or responsibility of taking care of a child. And that’s perfectly fine. Never heard anyone say they didn’t want to have kids because of some made up moral obligation. That’s just my experience though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on March 02, 2019, 09:53:28 AM
I probably fall into the category of an older millennial (I don’t identify with those fucktards though), but I’m at the age where many of my friends are having kids and I’ve never heard anyone say this. If young people aren’t having kids, it’s usually because they’re single/not married yet/don’t plan on getting married, or don’t want the economic burden or responsibility of taking care of a child. And that’s perfectly fine. Never heard anyone say they didn’t want to have kids because of some made up moral obligation. That’s just my experience though.

In my social circles it's pretty common. I've heard different versions of that same idea (having a child is the most damaging thing an individual can do for the environment, having a child not knowing the environmental stability of the world they will grow old in is scary) since I was in college ~10 years ago
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 02, 2019, 06:46:48 PM
Quote
having a child is the most damaging thing an individual can do for the environment
Self-righteous utter selfiishness at play.  Question is, which side owns it.   

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 02, 2019, 07:33:18 PM
Self-righteous utter selfiishness at play.  Question is, which side owns it.
Wait are you arguing that having a child is a selfless act?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 03, 2019, 08:34:37 AM
Wait are you arguing that having a child is a selfless act?
Point taken.

And imho it depends on who owns it.  Take for example a woman who badly wants to have a kid and her partner who for purely selfish reasons doesn't (i.e. doesn't want to deal with the child-rearing responsibility, the costs involved, etc.).  He relents, becomes a 'selfless' team player and makes 1st team all-family by becoming a daddy. Again point taken,  I'm just not yet at the stage of auto defaulting to environmental considerations when it comes to having kids. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 03, 2019, 04:02:45 PM
Point taken.

And imho it depends on who owns it.  Take for example a woman who badly wants to have a kid and her partner who for purely selfish reasons doesn't (i.e. doesn't want to deal with the child-rearing responsibility, the costs involved, etc.).  He relents, becomes a 'selfless' team player and makes 1st team all-family by becoming a daddy. Again point taken,  I'm just not yet at the stage of auto defaulting to environmental considerations when it comes to having kids.

I'm not sure how that's selfless.  You're bringing a child into this world who's father doesnt want him/her.  Selfless for the mother maybe, but it's irresponsible and definitely not selfless to the kid.

You dont need to change your mind about having kids because of the environment, but it's good to at the very least think about the environment you'll kids will grow up in when deciding on whether you want to have kids.



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 03, 2019, 04:44:23 PM
I'm not sure how that's selfless.  You're bringing a child into this world who's father doesnt want him/her.  Selfless for the mother maybe, but it's irresponsible and definitely not selfless to the kid.

You dont need to change your mind about having kids because of the environment, but it's good to at the very least think about the environment you'll kids will grow up in when deciding on whether you want to have kids.


Your parents should have aborted you since the world is going to end in 10 years
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 03, 2019, 04:44:46 PM
^that was harsh, jk, ily insanity
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 03, 2019, 05:31:22 PM
I probably fall into the category of an older millennial (I don’t identify with those fucktards though), but I’m at the age where many of my friends are having kids and I’ve never heard anyone say this. If young people aren’t having kids, it’s usually because they’re single/not married yet/don’t plan on getting married, or don’t want the economic burden or responsibility of taking care of a child. And that’s perfectly fine. Never heard anyone say they didn’t want to have kids because of some made up moral obligation. That’s just my experience though.
It's interesting how the right call liberals snowflakes, but when someone on the left makes a point that is beyond a conservatives scope of consideration they consider it a personal attack.

I would personally love to have children, but I'm worried about being able to provide for them, even with my salary.  I'm worried about what the climate will be when they're adults; will they be able to live a full life and how will effect our food supply?
I'm worried about what technology is going to do for their job market and what the economy is going to look like if we keep going along our current path. 

If I was to become a parent I'd probably be more comfortable adopting because I know how many children in this world grow up without food or parents, and I'd rather care for one of those children than bring another hungry mouth into this world.

Some of my friends share my viewpoint, but not all and most not to my extreme.  Am I more pessimistic than most, most definitely.  I'm just thinking about the effects my actions have on my children and on the world.  Just like AOC.
But I would never judge someone else for their decision. 

In that video AOC isnt saying to stop having children and that she's going to prevent you from having kids with her political power. 
She's asking you to think about the effects having children have on the world around you.  She's asking you to think about the world your kids will be growing up in before making a decision.  She's asking you to think about your children's future when you're making daily decisions and your opinions on policy.

Why is that a problem and such a big deal?


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 03, 2019, 05:33:21 PM
^that was harsh, jk, ily insanity
Eat a dick  :-*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 04, 2019, 11:45:46 AM
https://m.youtube.com/watch?feature=youtu.be&v=Uc8oafmZHEc

The comments on this are WILD
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 04, 2019, 11:50:38 AM
It's interesting how the right call liberals snowflakes, but when someone on the left makes a point that is beyond a conservatives scope of consideration they consider it a personal attack.

I would personally love to have children, but I'm worried about being able to provide for them, even with my salary.  I'm worried about what the climate will be when they're adults; will they be able to live a full life and how will effect our food supply?
I'm worried about what technology is going to do for their job market and what the economy is going to look like if we keep going along our current path. 

If I was to become a parent I'd probably be more comfortable adopting because I know how many children in this world grow up without food or parents, and I'd rather care for one of those children than bring another hungry mouth into this world.

Some of my friends share my viewpoint, but not all and most not to my extreme.  Am I more pessimistic than most, most definitely.  I'm just thinking about the effects my actions have on my children and on the world.  Just like AOC.
But I would never judge someone else for their decision. 

In that video AOC isnt saying to stop having children and that she's going to prevent you from having kids with her political power. 
She's asking you to think about the effects having children have on the world around you.  She's asking you to think about the world your kids will be growing up in before making a decision.  She's asking you to think about your children's future when you're making daily decisions and your opinions on policy.

Why is that a problem and such a big deal?




I’m cool with you having that opinion, that’s completely fine.  I’m not a big fan of the government suggesting or telling me what to do. I’m not saying she took it that far, but it’s seems like we’re at the top of a slippery slope. She’s borderline shaming human beings for reproducing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 04, 2019, 11:59:46 AM
I’m not a big fan of the government suggesting or telling me what to do. I’m not saying she took it that far, but it’s seems like we’re at the top of a slippery slope. She’s borderline shaming human beings for reproducing.

That's what I don't get though.

I get you don't want the government to control you, agreed.  I'm actually for less government intervention, but I think we're at a point in time where more intervention is needed because greed has gotten out of hand.

But, if the government has information you are not privy to and wants to provide recommendations on how to improve you, your family, and the country's well being, what's wrong with sharing that information?

In the video she didn't even say you should or shouldn't do something, she said, "people are wondering if they should have kids"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on March 04, 2019, 04:58:26 PM
That's what I don't get though.

I get you don't want the government to control you, agreed.  I'm actually for less government intervention, but I think we're at a point in time where more intervention is needed because greed has gotten out of hand.

But, if the government has information you are not privy to and wants to provide recommendations on how to improve you, your family, and the country's well being, what's wrong with sharing that information?

In the video she didn't even say you should or shouldn't do something, she said, "people are wondering if they should have kids"

(https://img.buzzfeed.com/buzzfeed-static/static/2015-10/21/17/campaign_images/webdr11/asi-fue-como-empezo-el-famoso-meme-de-nick-young-2-4116-1445462065-15_dblbig.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 05, 2019, 05:51:24 AM
https://www.businessinsider.com/millennials-americans-worry-about-kids-children-climate-change-poll-2019-3?utm_source=reddit.com

Fwiw
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 05, 2019, 08:23:01 AM
I'm not sure how that's selfless.  You're bringing a child into this world who's father doesnt want him/her.  Selfless for the mother maybe, but it's irresponsible and definitely not selfless to the kid.

You dont need to change your mind about having kids because of the environment, but it's good to at the very least think about the environment you'll kids will grow up in when deciding on whether you want to have kids.
I've no problem with the environmentally conscious mindset.  As for selfless, I meant it in the sacrifice sense of the word - dad does it for mom and makes the best of it (sort of like on the flip side how parents stay together for the sake of the kid).  That said, the U.S. birthrates are hitting record level lows: https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2018/5/22/17376536/fertility-rate-united-states-births-women



 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 08, 2019, 12:52:32 PM
I've mostly kept away from political chat lately, but Elizabeth Warren needs to freak right off.

She wants to "break up" Amazon, Google, and Facebook and regulate them like utilities. She's suggesting that Google's search should be a separate company from its ad business. Google's ad business is how Alphabet stays in business and provides all the "free" services everyone enjoys like search, GMail, and Android. She also wants to prevent Amazon from selling its own "Basics" products on its own site, believing that it will help smaller vendors compete. I don't even know what she wants to do with Facebook.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 08, 2019, 01:20:45 PM
I've mostly kept away from political chat lately, but Elizabeth Warren needs to freak right off.

She wants to "break up" Amazon, Google, and Facebook and regulate them like utilities. She's suggesting that Google's search should be a separate company from its ad business. Google's ad business is how Alphabet stays in business and provides all the "free" services everyone enjoys like search, GMail, and Android. She also wants to prevent Amazon from selling its own "Basics" products on its own site, believing that it will help smaller vendors compete. I don't even know what she wants to do with Facebook.

There has long been an argument, and quite a compelling one, that a legislation-backed break up of the big four is in everyone's best interest. There was a lengthy piece about it a few months back in a magazine, possibly the Economist, which made a very good case for it. I'll see if I can dig it up for you.

Edit: found it.

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a15895746/bust-big-tech-silicon-valley/

Bear in mind there's loads of precedent for this - the US government has been routinely busting up Ma Bell for decades, and for good reason.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 08, 2019, 03:08:45 PM
There has long been an argument, and quite a compelling one, that a legislation-backed break up of the big four is in everyone's best interest. There was a lengthy piece about it a few months back in a magazine, possibly the Economist, which made a very good case for it. I'll see if I can dig it up for you.

Edit: found it.

https://www.esquire.com/news-politics/a15895746/bust-big-tech-silicon-valley/

Bear in mind there's loads of precedent for this - the US government has been routinely busting up Ma Bell for decades, and for good reason.

The irony of multiple Amazon ads as I scrolled through that article...

I can understand fighting off monopoly power (and in fairness, I can understand the argument against Amazon Basics--though I disagree with Warren's stance) but if you force Google to separate its ad piece from the rest of the company, Alphabet stops being a profitable company--unless they start charging for all the individual services we currently enjoy for free.

Does something need to be done about megacorps? Hell yeah. This is the science-fiction fear of decades past where just a handful of companies rule the entire planet. But you can't just run around screaming "Break them up!" like that will suddenly make everyone's lives better.

I'm okay with regulation, I am a Democrat after all, if it's in terms of oversight. But I'm not in favor of cutting these companies into smaller parts. For example, I'd drop my Prime membership if I stopped getting both free shipping and Prime Video with one fee. There's no chance I'd continue using GMail if I suddenly had to pay a subscription fee for it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 08, 2019, 03:55:39 PM
I've mostly kept away from political chat lately, but Elizabeth Warren needs to freak right off.

She wants to "break up" Amazon, Google, and Facebook and regulate them like utilities. She's suggesting that Google's search should be a separate company from its ad business. Google's ad business is how Alphabet stays in business and provides all the "free" services everyone enjoys like search, GMail, and Android. She also wants to prevent Amazon from selling its own "Basics" products on its own site, believing that it will help smaller vendors compete. I don't even know what she wants to do with Facebook.

Yeah, I'm not sure I agree with how she's saying it should be done, but it needs to be.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 08, 2019, 03:56:06 PM
Policy aside, I like the way she Politic

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1104069510238269440
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 08, 2019, 04:03:27 PM
The irony of multiple Amazon ads as I scrolled through that article...

I can understand fighting off monopoly power (and in fairness, I can understand the argument against Amazon Basics--though I disagree with Warren's stance) but if you force Google to separate its ad piece from the rest of the company, Alphabet stops being a profitable company--unless they start charging for all the individual services we currently enjoy for free.

Does something need to be done about megacorps? Hell yeah. This is the science-fiction fear of decades past where just a handful of companies rule the entire planet. But you can't just run around screaming "Break them up!" like that will suddenly make everyone's lives better.

I'm okay with regulation, I am a Democrat after all, if it's in terms of oversight. But I'm not in favor of cutting these companies into smaller parts. For example, I'd drop my Prime membership if I stopped getting both free shipping and Prime Video with one fee. There's no chance I'd continue using GMail if I suddenly had to pay a subscription fee for it.

OK, but that's not your problem or Warren's or anyone else's other than Alphabet's to solve, and in fact isn't that pretty much the point? I don't know if you read the article (it's long but it's worth it), but the whole point of breaking them up isn't to keep them profitable, it's to ensure that competition can thrive because right now those four have the corporate might to crush anyone who might wish to try.

The fact that you say "there's no chance I'd continue using GMail if I suddenly had to pay a subscription fee for it" is exactly why it should be broken up. You're looking at it as what you'd lose if this happened, not what you'd gain. Right now you get what the big four are willing to allow you to have, not what you've chosen in the marketplace because there currently is no marketplace.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 08, 2019, 04:04:49 PM
OK, but that's not your problem or Warren's or anyone else's other than Alphabet's to solve, and in fact isn't that pretty much the point? I don't know if you read the article (it's long but it's worth it), but the whole point of breaking them up isn't to keep them profitable, it's to ensure that competition can thrive because right now those four have the corporate might to crush anyone who might wish to try.

The fact that you say "there's no chance I'd continue using GMail if I suddenly had to pay a subscription fee for it" is exactly why it should be broken up. You're looking at it as what you'd lose if this happened, not what you'd gain. Right now you get what the big four are willing to allow you to have, not what you've chosen in the marketplace because there currently is no marketplace.

Wow, great post.  Never thought about it that way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 11, 2019, 12:23:39 PM
OK, but that's not your problem or Warren's or anyone else's other than Alphabet's to solve, and in fact isn't that pretty much the point? I don't know if you read the article (it's long but it's worth it), but the whole point of breaking them up isn't to keep them profitable, it's to ensure that competition can thrive because right now those four have the corporate might to crush anyone who might wish to try.

The fact that you say "there's no chance I'd continue using GMail if I suddenly had to pay a subscription fee for it" is exactly why it should be broken up. You're looking at it as what you'd lose if this happened, not what you'd gain. Right now you get what the big four are willing to allow you to have, not what you've chosen in the marketplace because there currently is no marketplace.

We strongly disagree here.

It's not Alphabet's problem to solve to find a new way to be profitable just because some politician has decided they're the big bad wolf. Google's entire business model, since day 1, has been to use the data they collect from any of their offerings to serve advertising across the internet.

The idea that I'd gain anything by breaking them up is ridiculous. I have Microsoft Office through work, so why would I then pay for Sheets? I have functioning email addresses with AOL, Yahoo, and Outlook.com, so why would I pay for GMail? I have loads of data on USB thumb drives and an MS OneDrive account, so why would I pay for Drive?

Should there be some punitive action against the Big 4? Sure, I can get on board with that. Microsoft was once punished by the DOJ for anti-competitive practices, and the Big 4 is certainly due for some hand-spanking. But breaking them up? Absolutely not.

And yes, I did read that entire article, long-winded as it was. I had some issues with some of the things he wrote, but I can't recall what they were anymore. Suffice to say, I disagree with him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 11, 2019, 12:30:12 PM
The idea that I'd gain anything by breaking them up is ridiculous. I have Microsoft Office through work, so why would I then pay for Sheets? I have functioning email addresses with AOL, Yahoo, and Outlook.com, so why would I pay for GMail? I have loads of data on USB thumb drives and an MS OneDrive account, so why would I pay for Drive?

Just because you don't understand it, doesn't make it ridiculous. No one is saying that Gmail or anything else would suddenly become chargeable.

The big four are killing innovation. If you can't see that then you understand coding more than you understand the industry itself.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 11, 2019, 02:09:55 PM
Just because you don't understand it, doesn't make it ridiculous. No one is saying that Gmail or anything else would suddenly become chargeable.

The big four are killing innovation. If you can't see that then you understand coding more than you understand the industry itself.

Save your condescending bullshit.

I enjoy things provided by 2 of the Big 4 right now. Things like GMail, or Prime shipping plus video. What would I get from their breakup? Apart from some theoretical "competition breeds innovation" because there already is competition for all 4 of them for every service they provide.

What motivation does Alphabet have to let people use GMail for free if the product is separated from its advertising business? What does it provide me to split Prime shipping from Prime video, other than me paying for two services instead of one?

I granted things like the example of Amazon Basics being anti-competitive as a reasonable target to go after. Again, I'm okay with the idea of some regulation/oversight. But the idea of breaking these companies up is ridiculous and hurts me, the consumer, more than some perceived lack of competition.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 11, 2019, 02:28:01 PM
Save your condescending bullshit.

I enjoy things provided by 2 of the Big 4 right now. Things like GMail, or Prime shipping plus video. What would I get from their breakup? Apart from some theoretical "competition breeds innovation" because there already is competition for all 4 of them for every service they provide.

What motivation does Alphabet have to let people use GMail for free if the product is separated from its advertising business? What does it provide me to split Prime shipping from Prime video, other than me paying for two services instead of one?

I granted things like the example of Amazon Basics being anti-competitive as a reasonable target to go after. Again, I'm okay with the idea of some regulation/oversight. But the idea of breaking these companies up is ridiculous and hurts me, the consumer, more than some perceived lack of competition.

So you agree that breaking up the big four does make sense, but only as long as it doesn't impact the services that you receive. Which is great, I agree. No one wants to regress, but that's the point. We're only progressing at the speed they allow us to right now.

Look at telecom as a direct analog to this situation, because it is. What's in it for a major player to innovate rather than sweat existing assets if they don't have a competitive driver to do so? If you've got no choice but to buy from me, why am I remotely interested in giving you anything that costs me more money to deliver? We broke up Bell and BT and large telcos around the world for exactly this reason.

The separation of Gmail and Alphabet Advertising doesn't automatically make Gmail a chargeable service, BTW. There's nothing stopping Alphabet paying Gmail for the right to use their platform to sell advertising space, just like ad agencies pay Maiden for the right to put billboards up on their real estate. There's also nothing in that situation stopping someone coming along and giving Gmail a better offer, or another mail platform giving Alphabet better pricing. None of that culture exists right now, and Google isn't even the worst culprit. Facebook are the very first in my crosshairs when I'm emperor of the world.

Oversized companies dominating large markets have resulted in competition and improved customer product and service delivery exactly zero times in the history of commerce. There's no logical argument to your position.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 11, 2019, 02:42:58 PM
look at the telco nightmare here in canada. we pay the most money in the world for the lowest levels of service because there are 2 big companies here, and they hold each others hands while they end us over and reem us.

the crtc is the slowest moving organization on earth, and have little desire to fix the problem. they forced the telcos to rent out bandwidth/line space to smaller telcos(like the one i work for), on lines the public paid for.

rogers dosent like this, so they are actually investing their own money into upgrading their own infrastructure that they can then keep private for their own cx. good for them, still terrible for consumers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 11, 2019, 02:54:14 PM
So you agree that breaking up the big four does make sense, but only as long as it doesn't impact the services that you receive. Which is great, I agree. No one wants to regress, but that's the point. We're only progressing at the speed they allow us to right now.

Look at telecom as a direct analog to this situation, because it is. What's in it for a major player to innovate rather than sweat existing assets if they don't have a competitive driver to do so? If you've got no choice but to buy from me, why am I remotely interested in giving you anything that costs me more money to deliver? We broke up Bell and BT and large telcos around the world for exactly this reason.

The separation of Gmail and Alphabet Advertising doesn't automatically make Gmail a chargeable service, BTW. There's nothing stopping Alphabet paying Gmail for the right to use their platform to sell advertising space, just like ad agencies pay Maiden for the right to put billboards up on their real estate. There's also nothing in that situation stopping someone coming along and giving Gmail a better offer, or another mail platform giving Alphabet better pricing. None of that culture exists right now, and Google isn't even the worst culprit. Facebook are the very first in my crosshairs when I'm emperor of the world.

Oversized companies dominating large markets have resulted in competition and improved customer product and service delivery exactly zero times in the history of commerce. There's no logical argument to your position.

Telecoms provide a singular service or at least did when they were broken up. And they don't provide too many different services today. It's phone calls and data delivery.

Amazon provides disparate services for my Prime membership. I get free shipping, access to a growing catalog of movies and TV, free ebooks, and other things I haven't yet used, such as Whole Foods discounts. Alphabet provides me free email, search, office-competitive tools, cloud storage and the operating system on my mobile devices.

I don't use Apple products, and other than FB being a den of dishonesty and a forum for the lowest common denominator of society, I don't care about them.

Your argument is disputed by the actual real-world actions of the above companies. Google has developed many products despite market dominance. Amazon continues to introduce new services. Apple has direct competition on both the PC side and the mobile side. Facebook really just acquires companies, but whatever.

I understand your POV, but I disagree with it. The place I'd act on these companies is in forcing them to pay their fair share of taxes. Some oversight would be fair as well. Again, I can understand targeting something like Amazon Basics for selling competing products at cut-rate prices. That's using monopolistic power for competitive advantage. But even then, it doesn't negatively affect me as a consumer, whereas the problem with monopolies is supposed to be a negative effect on the consumer. They're controlling prices down not up. It may hurt other businesses trying to sell competing products, but that's not my problem.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 11, 2019, 04:27:04 PM
But even then, it doesn't negatively affect me as a consumer, whereas the problem with monopolies is supposed to be a negative effect on the consumer.

You don't think a company offering products for free has an effect on competition and the number of products you could choose from?  There is a reason there are price floors.

Whereas the problem with monopolies is supposed to be a negative effect on the consumer.  It may hurt other businesses trying to sell competing products, but that's not my problem.
I've never heard that the reason govt break up monopolies is only because of the negative effect on the consumer.  It has a negative effect on everyone involved in the economy.  Customers, competitors, partners, providors, etc.


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 12, 2019, 12:04:13 PM
You don't think a company offering products for free has an effect on competition and the number of products you could choose from?  There is a reason there are price floors.
I've never heard that the reason govt break up monopolies is only because of the negative effect on the consumer.  It has a negative effect on everyone involved in the economy. Customers, competitors, partners, providors, etc.

Which is true, but that's where I turn the conversation back around to something JE said earlier in it. So? Competitors not being able to compete is a problem they should have to solve, not you and I, nor the government.

The argument you're making has always been used to justify a problem to the consumer: higher prices due to less competition--an objectively bad result. If a monopoly isn't controlling prices to the detriment of the consumer, I don't see how it's bad for them to exist.

Let's use my favorite remaining retail store, Barnes and Noble, for example. Amazon is killing them and there's a real chance B&N may go out of business. Is that the DOJ's job to prevent, or is the problem that B&N isn't agile at all? I'd argue the latter. Here's an idea I had for B&N this past holiday season: stop selling vinyl records, record players, and DVDs, and instead capitalize on the disappearance of Toys R Us by expanding their toy selection. Instead, there is still physical media inventory on the shelves from the holidays left unsold.

Artificially keeping sinking companies afloat doesn't help anyone but those companies. Yes, all those B&N employees will lose their jobs if the stores close, but that may happen even if Amazon is broken up. Again, bad business decisions aren't the responsibility of oversight to clean up.

Just FTR, I believe Amazon is a monster that does use unfair tactics--especially against their supply chain. That needs to be looked at, and again, possibly regulated. But I don't see how separating Prime shipping and video from each other provides anyone a benefit. If someone can realistically address how it would, I'll certainly entertain the idea. But it feels like the argument against the Big 4 is just a contrived "Well, they're big so they're bad, and if they're small everything will be better" and that just doesn't resonate with me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 12, 2019, 10:27:40 PM
Which is true, but that's where I turn the conversation back around to something JE said earlier in it. So? Competitors not being able to compete is a problem they should have to solve, not you and I, nor the government.

The argument you're making has always been used to justify a problem to the consumer: higher prices due to less competition--an objectively bad result. If a monopoly isn't controlling prices to the detriment of the consumer, I don't see how it's bad for them to exist.

Let's use my favorite remaining retail store, Barnes and Noble, for example. Amazon is killing them and there's a real chance B&N may go out of business. Is that the DOJ's job to prevent, or is the problem that B&N isn't agile at all? I'd argue the latter. Here's an idea I had for B&N this past holiday season: stop selling vinyl records, record players, and DVDs, and instead capitalize on the disappearance of Toys R Us by expanding their toy selection. Instead, there is still physical media inventory on the shelves from the holidays left unsold.

Artificially keeping sinking companies afloat doesn't help anyone but those companies. Yes, all those B&N employees will lose their jobs if the stores close, but that may happen even if Amazon is broken up. Again, bad business decisions aren't the responsibility of oversight to clean up.

Just FTR, I believe Amazon is a monster that does use unfair tactics--especially against their supply chain. That needs to be looked at, and again, possibly regulated. But I don't see how separating Prime shipping and video from each other provides anyone a benefit. If someone can realistically address how it would, I'll certainly entertain the idea. But it feels like the argument against the Big 4 is just a contrived "Well, they're big so they're bad, and if they're small everything will be better" and that just doesn't resonate with me.
It's the DOJs job to make sure all competitors dont go out of business because then Amazon can do whatever with prices and quality because no one can compete.

Have you read the diapers.com paper?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 13, 2019, 11:37:36 AM
It's the DOJs job to make sure all competitors dont go out of business because then Amazon can do whatever with prices and quality because no one can compete.

Have you read the diapers.com paper?

That's certainly fair, and agrees with what I've been saying (protecting the consumer is the job of the DOJ vs. monopolies).

I have not read the paper. Do you have a link? diapers.com doesn't connect to anything when I try it.

FTR, I'm not quite as pro-Big-4 as I'm portraying myself in this conversation. I think they're all due for a good baseball bat to the knees. That said, I'm also very leery of the idea of "break them up" as a means toward making life better for everyone. I really don't think it's as black-and-white as it's being portrayed, and in the near-term could be quite painful to American consumers if Warren were to get her way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 14, 2019, 07:02:06 AM
That's certainly fair, and agrees with what I've been saying (protecting the consumer is the job of the DOJ vs. monopolies).

Right and sometimes to protect the customer you may need to intervene before it's too late.  My only real problem is with Amazon at the moment TBH.

I have not read the paper. Do you have a link? diapers.com doesn't connect to anything when I try it.
I actually cant find it anymore either.  It was a long article about Amazon practices.  Basically they use one part of their business to allow for non profitable price gauging so they can destroy competition and then raise prices back to their normal position.

Bezos wanted to acquire diapers.com.  owners said no.  Bezos said you'll regret that.  Undercut all their prices significantly.  Every single sku they had.  Then just waited because diapers couldn't compete.  Then they came back with an offer tht was 60% less, and diapers couldn't do anything about it. 

Amazon acquired them, then raised their prices back to normal prices.  Now that they've fully acquired and integrated the company they are shutting down the business

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 14, 2019, 07:44:49 AM
https://mobile.twitter.com/comfortablysmug/status/1105986971032268802

(http://i68.tinypic.com/11kbl12.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 14, 2019, 12:23:30 PM
Right and sometimes to protect the customer you may need to intervene before it's too late.  My only real problem is with Amazon at the moment TBH.
I actually cant find it anymore either.  It was a long article about Amazon practices.  Basically they use one part of their business to allow for non profitable price gauging so they can destroy competition and then raise prices back to their normal position.

Bezos wanted to acquire diapers.com.  owners said no.  Bezos said you'll regret that.  Undercut all their prices significantly.  Every single sku they had.  Then just waited because diapers couldn't compete.  Then they came back with an offer tht was 60% less, and diapers couldn't do anything about it. 

Amazon acquired them, then raised their prices back to normal prices.  Now that they've fully acquired and integrated the company they are shutting down the business

That's a legitimate reason to pursue them. That's kind of along the same lines with their strongarming of their distribution channels. Don't want to give us cut-rate pricing so we can sell products at 35% below MSRP? Okay, we'll find someone else who will, and you'll have zero business in a year.

Again, I'd say "absolutely not" if the question is: should we break up Amazon? Fine them harshly, absolutely. Demand they submit to oversight via external audits, sure. But splitting the core shipping business from the streaming video business serves no benefit to the consumer, and that's the crux of my argument.

Incidentally, of the Big-4, I think Facebook is the biggest menace to the general public. I'm all about allowing my data to be used to serve me advertising and I haven't been under an illusion of having privacy since not very long after 9/11/01, but Facebook borders on--if it's not absolutely guilty of--criminal negligence with user data, and the information, both true and false, being spread on their platform.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 14, 2019, 05:18:59 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/comfortablysmug/status/1105986971032268802

(http://i68.tinypic.com/11kbl12.jpg)

freaking guys name is Robert Francis. This whole Beto bullshit is such a farce.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 14, 2019, 07:09:08 PM
https://twitter.com/vibehi/status/1106187429705338880

#YangGang
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on March 14, 2019, 07:32:02 PM
https://twitter.com/vibehi/status/1106187429705338880

#YangGang

also this lol

(https://i.redd.it/pls5ipa1n2m21.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 14, 2019, 08:14:23 PM
https://twitter.com/vibehi/status/1106187429705338880

#YangGang

I have no clue who this guy is, but Did you actually watch the video?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 14, 2019, 08:18:27 PM
I have no clue who this guy is, but Did you actually watch the video?



You have no clue who Andrew Yang is?

Yes, I had to watch the video several times to make sure I heard what he was saying correctly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 15, 2019, 06:45:54 AM
You have no clue who Andrew Yang is?

Yes, I had to watch the video several times to make sure I heard what he was saying correctly.
So you realize he didnt say what was in the tweet.

I'm not a huge fan of his narrative because its dividing the country once more, but he's talking about his own fear of what could happen.  And if you look at Americas past between the japanese concentration camps and why we've done most recently with mexican immigrants is he really that far off?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 15, 2019, 07:47:11 AM
So you realize he didnt say what was in the tweet.

I'm not a huge fan of his narrative because its dividing the country once more, but he's talking about his own fear of what could happen.  And if you look at Americas past between the japanese concentration camps and why we've done most recently with mexican immigrants is he really that far off?

I didn’t pay any attention to the caption of the tweet. I got linked there from Yang arguing with Jack Posobiec on twitter lol


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on March 15, 2019, 10:12:06 AM
I didn’t pay any attention to the caption of the tweet. I got linked there from Yang arguing with Jack Posobiec on twitter lol

Yeah the tweet caption was very misleading and/or willfully retarded.
"Omggg Yang said Asians gonna be put in concentration camps!!", or something equally intelligent.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 15, 2019, 03:18:02 PM
Quote
@Mollyhc: I asked Beto if his ultimate goal on health care is to get to single payer. “No,” he said. “My goal is to get to guaranteed high quality health care for all.”

On his last statements on single payer: “I’m no longer sure that’s the fastest way to get to universal health care.”

Quote
@waleedshahid: There it is. Beto has flipped on single-payer Medicare for All, which he said he supported during his Senate run against Ted Cruz, and is now officially backing away from.

Beto is canceled
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 15, 2019, 03:23:07 PM
Beto is canceled

LOL wtf, I totally like Beto now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 18, 2019, 08:49:44 PM
https://www.thedailybeast.com/andrew-yang-the-upstart-democratic-presidential-candidate-comes-out-against-circumcision
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 21, 2019, 11:19:03 AM
Putting all political views to one side for a moment, this excrement is objectively funny.

Mexicans are stealing the wall (https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/news/mexicans-arrested-in-tijuana-for-stealing-razor-wire-from-the-top-of-border-fence)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 23, 2019, 09:06:19 PM
https://twitter.com/freebeacon/status/1108790650999357440

This is great
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 24, 2019, 03:46:53 PM
excrement hoax always was excrement.

RIP MUH RUSSIA!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 24, 2019, 08:02:39 PM
https://twitter.com/betoorourke/status/1109927563277721600

This dude is a living meme
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 26, 2019, 09:33:30 AM
avenatti may be a prick but hes right, dems need someone who will physically fist fight trump if they need to. no holding back.

i dunno if beto is that guy, considering his race against cruz.

i like buttigieg, he seems smart enough, and he clearly knows how to freak someones derriere up if he needs to
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 26, 2019, 10:46:44 PM
https://www.lee.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/speeches?ID=2271BAF4-7F34-4BE8-81C5-B621E9BAF878
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 07, 2019, 05:01:31 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/thehill/status/1114971900269219841

Comment section is lit
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 07, 2019, 07:42:46 PM
BUT MY FREE GMAIL! (https://boingboing.net/2019/04/03/i-hate-being-right-2.html)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 08, 2019, 11:00:43 AM
Quote
@BernieSanders: Meanwhile, one in four Americans skip health care they need because they can't afford it.

Our health care system today is fundamentally immoral and that is why we must pass Medicare for All.

Shots fired @Obama
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 25, 2019, 01:27:04 PM
https://twitter.com/jamiedupree/status/1121447208572813315

lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 25, 2019, 02:15:40 PM
https://twitter.com/jamiedupree/status/1121447208572813315

lol

I really can't stand her.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 25, 2019, 03:02:48 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/thehill/status/1114971900269219841

Comment section is lit

LOL WTF I TOTALLY LIKE BERNIE NOW!

Shots fired @Obama

Ah excrement, nvm.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 25, 2019, 06:48:11 PM
I really can't stand her.
I'm afraid your AOC derangement syndrome is terminal
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 15, 2019, 11:37:49 PM
So who here is cool with their daughter going to school at Alabama or Auburn? Anyone think they might suggest that the weather in Oregon or California is nicer?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 03, 2019, 11:10:26 PM
https://twitter.com/realsaavedra/status/1179908480322289664?s=21

Climate change deniers will say it’s fake
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 03, 2019, 11:17:25 PM
For the record: She didn’t say no.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 05, 2019, 12:15:24 PM
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2019/10/05/us-diplomats-wife-claims-immunity-leaves-uk-afterfatal-road/

freaking Woody Johnson better step his excrement up
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 06, 2019, 08:25:29 PM
https://twitter.com/realsaavedra/status/1179908480322289664?s=21

Climate change deniers will say it’s fake
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20191007/93f9c6e7a5e28986b0d2766d349a48d0.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 08, 2019, 09:01:41 AM
Interesting seeing all this stuff with China and censorship popping up lately. The Houston GM, South osrk/Disney, and then the Activision Blizzard thing.

I think organizations appeasing China (ie Disney) could soon become a source of bad publicity

And while Trump has been a freaking derriere for the most part of his presidency, I think his eternal war with China could rally some people to support him. It won't completely overshadow the constant nonsense he stirs, but Chinas economic influence is essentially giving them some power to censor Americans or American properties.

(ie China essentially temporarily banned the NBA in China because of a stupid freaking tweet)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 08, 2019, 10:02:49 AM
Interesting seeing all this stuff with China and censorship popping up lately. The Houston GM, South osrk/Disney, and then the Activision Blizzard thing.

I think organizations appeasing China (ie Disney) could soon become a source of bad publicity

And while Trump has been a freaking derriere for the most part of his presidency, I think his eternal war with China could rally some people to support him. It won't completely overshadow the constant nonsense he stirs, but Chinas economic influence is essentially giving them some power to censor Americans or American properties.

(ie China essentially temporarily banned the NBA in China because of a stupid freaking tweet)

i mean, anyone who thinks china is losing this tarrif war is already voting for trump, so whats it matter?

china isn't going to acquiesce until they get exactly what they want, which is nobody to talk about hong kong. trump isnt going to say excrement about hong kong so theyve already won.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 08, 2019, 10:22:18 AM
i mean, anyone who thinks china is losing this tarrif war is already voting for trump, so whats it matter?

china isn't going to acquiesce until they get exactly what they want, which is nobody to talk about hong kong. trump isnt going to say excrement about hong kong so theyve already won.


I know Trump already basically offered to throw Hong Kong under the bus (which isn't doing him any favors)

But now that this whole censorship debate is arising, and how Trump loves to get involved with anything that's a hot topic in the media. It should be interesting to see if and how it changes his stance
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on October 08, 2019, 01:40:14 PM
Trump likes money. Trump is like the NBA. He doesn't want to freak with the money.

Trump is using the presidency to enrich himself. He's not going to get in the way of that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2019, 01:45:43 PM
Trump likes money. Trump is like the NBA. He doesn't want to freak with the money.

Trump is using the presidency to enrich himself. He's not going to get in the way of that.

Based on what.

I find it unbelievable that previous Presidents could have their net worth rocket in the fashion it does post-Presidency and they aren't accused of same.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2019, 01:47:51 PM


I find it unbelievable that previous Presidents could have their net worth rocket in the fashion it does post-Presidency and they aren't accused of same.

Ok, launch them all into the sun.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on October 08, 2019, 01:50:52 PM
Based on what.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/saudi-funded-lobbyist-paid-for-500-rooms-at-trumps-hotel-after-2016-election/2018/12/05/29603a64-f417-11e8-bc79-68604ed88993_story.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/09/04/trump-presidency-spawns-conflicts-of-interest-personal-profits-column/2197263001/

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/17/us/politics/trump-emoluments-money.html

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/04/trump-and-co-are-stealing-america-blind-timeline.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2017-03-07/the-art-of-the-trump-enrichment-program

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/03/saudi-guests-boosted-revenue-at-trumps-new-york-hotel-reversing-drop.html

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/i-love-the-saudis-trump-business-ties-to-kingdom-run-deep

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/10/jared-kushner-real-estate-cadre-goldman-sachs
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2019, 02:04:42 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/saudi-funded-lobbyist-paid-for-500-rooms-at-trumps-hotel-after-2016-election/2018/12/05/29603a64-f417-11e8-bc79-68604ed88993_story.html

https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2019/09/04/trump-presidency-spawns-conflicts-of-interest-personal-profits-column/2197263001/

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/12/17/us/politics/trump-emoluments-money.html

http://nymag.com/intelligencer/2018/04/trump-and-co-are-stealing-america-blind-timeline.html

https://www.bloomberg.com/opinion/articles/2017-03-07/the-art-of-the-trump-enrichment-program

https://www.cnbc.com/2018/08/03/saudi-guests-boosted-revenue-at-trumps-new-york-hotel-reversing-drop.html

https://www.foxbusiness.com/markets/i-love-the-saudis-trump-business-ties-to-kingdom-run-deep

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2019/jun/10/jared-kushner-real-estate-cadre-goldman-sachs

So opinion columns from USA Today from partisan hacks, nonsense from TheGuardian and NEW YORK MAGAZINE. Lmao. K. The same publications that write articles about "Trumps Dictorial Tendencies" and employ Owen Jones. excrement.

He has business ties with the Saudis sure, there's absolutely no proof that he's utilized those ties in his office to enrich himself as you say.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 08, 2019, 02:25:10 PM
I'm pretty sure Obama benefitted financially more than any other president in US history, especially considering his pre and post presidency net worth.

Yet the dude whose a multi billionaire is doing it for money 🤷‍♂️

Trump probably VALUES money more than any president in the modern era. But I think thats far from his biggest problem.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on October 08, 2019, 02:30:02 PM
So opinion columns from USA Today from partisan hacks, nonsense from TheGuardian and NEW YORK MAGAZINE. Lmao. K. The same publications that write articles about "Trumps Dictorial Tendencies" and employ Owen Jones. excrement.

He has business ties with the Saudis sure, there's absolutely no proof that he's utilized those ties in his office to enrich himself as you say.
I mean, that took about 2 minutes of google searching. If you don't like all of the sources, that's fine. If you still support Trump at this stage, I'm not going to be able to convince you otherwise.

Trump probably VALUES money more than any president in the modern era. But I think thats far from his biggest problem.
I didn't say it was his biggest problem. But this proves my point. Trump isn't going to freak with the money when it comes to China. Granted, he might not be able to help himself.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 08, 2019, 03:20:56 PM
I mean, that took about 2 minutes of google searching. If you don't like all of the sources, that's fine. If you still support Trump at this stage, I'm not going to be able to convince you otherwise.
I didn't say it was his biggest problem. But this proves my point. Trump isn't going to freak with the money when it comes to China. Granted, he might not be able to help himself.

Trump also tends to be a little bit of a populist and people pleaser though (at least in his mind)

Who the freak knows what his thought process would be.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on October 15, 2019, 11:45:32 PM
There should be an age limit on being president. If there's a minimum age, why isn't there a maximum age?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 16, 2019, 03:25:31 AM
There should be an age limit on being president. If there's a minimum age, why isn't there a maximum age?

Because all the people in power are old fucks and lifetime politicians
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 16, 2019, 08:40:11 AM
There should be an age limit on being president. If there's a minimum age, why isn't there a maximum age?

Because 80 years old is the peak of human mental and physical ability, everyone knows that
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 21, 2019, 12:11:32 AM
Mitt Romney burner account, lol

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/10/mitt-romney-has-a-secret-twitter-account-and-it-sure-looks-like-its-this-one.amp
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 21, 2019, 07:12:56 PM
Mitt Romney burner account, lol

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2019/10/mitt-romney-has-a-secret-twitter-account-and-it-sure-looks-like-its-this-one.amp

PIERRE DELECTO?! HAHAHAHA are you freaking kidding me?!?!?!

If it didn't cost money, I'd absolutely be changing my PSN name to this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 21, 2019, 07:28:46 PM
It's the perfect pseudonym for a Mormon in disguise. Vaguely exotic and in his mind a little naughty.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 21, 2019, 09:58:32 PM
https://twitter.com/LLW902/status/1186468249023721472?s=09
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on October 22, 2019, 12:33:14 AM
I want a Pierre Delecto - Ron Mexico buddy cop movie. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 22, 2019, 12:06:32 PM
Don't forget Carlos Danger.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 24, 2019, 03:05:37 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7609835/amp/Katie-Hill-seen-showing-Nazi-era-tattoo-smoking-BONG-NAKED.html?__twitter_impression=true

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 24, 2019, 03:29:01 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7609835/amp/Katie-Hill-seen-showing-Nazi-era-tattoo-smoking-BONG-NAKED.html?__twitter_impression=true

Lol
Geez.  People are wild.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 24, 2019, 03:41:48 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-7609835/amp/Katie-Hill-seen-showing-Nazi-era-tattoo-smoking-BONG-NAKED.html?__twitter_impression=true

Lol

She's going for the 4chan vote, she's ticking all their boxes:

- naked pictures
- lesbian
- nazi
- weed

I'm not entirely convinced that it's an Iron Cross though, the ends of her tattoo look round. I would expect the Daily Heil of all publications to be able to recognise what an Iron Cross looks like. Also, the Iron Cross predates the Nazis and is back in use in a variety of forms. Motorhead used the Iron Cross extensively, and Lemmy was anything but a Nazi.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on October 25, 2019, 08:16:33 AM
These are the types of free spirits we can use in politics
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 07, 2020, 04:17:05 PM
I sincerely hope CNN just made Nick Sandmann freaking rich.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 07, 2020, 04:59:14 PM
Wondering how much of CNN's clicks and views come from conservatives hatewatching it because they always seem to have a deep and up to date knowledge of their network. They are the only people who have any sort of opinion of the Don Lemons of the world - he is a nonentity to normal people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 07, 2020, 05:54:49 PM
Wondering how much of CNN's clicks and views come from conservatives hatewatching it because they always seem to have a deep and up to date knowledge of their network. They are the only people who have any sort of opinion of the Don Lemons of the world - he is a nonentity to normal people.

Quoted for absolute hilarity when you consider those on the left and their penchant for being bringing up Fox News whenever they’re confronted with a conservative bend in a discussion.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 07, 2020, 07:08:40 PM
*2 spidermans pointing jpeg*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 07, 2020, 08:27:05 PM
Serious question, has CNN returned to relevance?

I don't follow any of this excrement or watch cable news. But I know it used to be fox and MSNBC with CNN just a dying irrelevant network

Though I also know Trump has constantly pointed them out for excrement, so maybe that's given some life to them?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 07, 2020, 09:04:47 PM


VAN JONES IS A LENINIST

FYP
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 07, 2020, 09:28:37 PM
*2 spidermans pointing jpeg*

I mean this as sincerely as I possibly can be.

If the situation was reversed, and some kid with a hope and change hoodie or some excrement got railroaded in the same vein Sandmann did by the Breitbarts or Fox's of the world, I'd hope they got freaking rich.


FYP

Ahahahahahaha, well I do say that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 08, 2020, 08:17:47 AM
How did Pelosi's funbags handle the Iranian missile attack?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 08, 2020, 08:44:39 AM
How did Pelosi's funbags handle the Iranian missile attack?
They negoTITated a fair compromise. 

She was kept abreast of the tituation.

Despite JUGgling many other affairs, she was able to nipple away at the Iranians many concerns.


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 08, 2020, 08:45:39 AM
They negoTITated a fair compromise. 

She was kept abreast of the tituation.

Despite JUGgling many other affairs, she was able to nipple away at the Iranians many concerns.




that's fantastit
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on January 08, 2020, 08:58:58 AM
Quoted for absolute hilarity when you consider those on the left and their penchant for being bringing up Fox News whenever they’re confronted with a conservative bend in a discussion.

Because fox news seems to sometimes not even care about the truth.  Literally at all.  I put it on pretty frequently and I'll say 75% of the time they seem completely agenda based with no interest in the actual truth.

CNN fucked up royally on the sandmann thing, and they definitely lean liberal, but grouping then with Washpost MSNBC and Huffpost of the world is wildly inaccurate. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 08, 2020, 11:40:45 AM
Watching the news is the quickest way to get AIDS
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 08, 2020, 05:39:44 PM
Anyway this got completely derailed from my point, which was that it's funny when conservatives reveal an above average fan-level knowledge of CNN and its employees when railing against them. Not the fact that they don't like CNN, just the disproportionate level of effort that goes into that dislike.

Cable news is not a great source of information unless you can filter it down to the bare facts, each network has bias, and they are all pro-corporate. K?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on January 08, 2020, 06:43:21 PM
Anyway this got completely derailed from my point, which was that it's funny when conservatives reveal an above average fan-level knowledge of CNN and its employees when railing against them. Not the fact that they don't like CNN, just the disproportionate level of effort that goes into that dislike.

Cable news is not a great source of information unless you can filter it down to the bare facts, each network has bias, and they are all pro-corporate. K?
I listen to MSNBC podcasts of some of their shows when I have time to kill. If news breaks when I'm at work, CNN and Fox News are my only options, so I'll take CNN every time. Every once in a while I try to watch Fox News to get the other perspective, especially when big news happens, but I usually can't watch it for more than a few minutes without getting infuriated. One of my coworkers hate watches Fox News at work, to see how the other half lives. I can't imagine doing that for very long.

None of those shows/channels should be your only resource for news.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on January 08, 2020, 08:13:20 PM
Honest question, is there even an unbiased news source out there?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 08, 2020, 09:28:21 PM
Honest question, is there even an unbiased news source out there?

Alex Jones
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 08, 2020, 10:02:44 PM
Honest question, is there even an unbiased news source out there?
No. Everyone has bias. Some just wear it on their sleeve.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on January 08, 2020, 10:30:00 PM
Honest question, is there even an unbiased news source out there?
On television no, print yes.
Reuters is unbiased and I've heard the AP is as well, but not sure about the latter
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on January 08, 2020, 11:36:58 PM
Honest question, is there even an unbiased news source out there?

Mother Jones
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 09, 2020, 06:05:39 AM
Usually the more boring it is, the more even it is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 09, 2020, 06:06:02 AM
On television no, print yes.
Reuters is unbiased and I've heard the AP is as well, but not sure about the latter
I did a super unscientific litmus test using the phrase "officer involved shooting" and Reuters passed, AP failed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on January 09, 2020, 07:06:08 AM
If you want some unbiased truth the reason we are in this situation is because of the removal of the fairness doctrine by Reagan.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 09, 2020, 11:19:00 AM
Speak of the devil

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200109/1ab0b4c3a5cae5bb20ac1d2fac3bc6ef.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on January 09, 2020, 01:25:24 PM
If you want some unbiased truth the reason we are in this situation is because of the removal of the fairness doctrine by Reagan.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/FCC_fairness_doctrine


Fairness doctrine wouldn't do excrement in the age of the internet.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on January 09, 2020, 08:39:06 PM
Fairness doctrine wouldn't do excrement in the age of the internet.
I disagree. 
1.  More people watch the news than you realize
2.  Having outlets you can trust will help show what excrement some sites are putting out on the internet
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 09, 2020, 09:01:22 PM
Shoutout to the awful 1996 Telecommunications Act
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 10, 2020, 04:24:46 PM
Beating mj to this one, something that actually matters

https://twitter.com/CWAUnion/status/1215760863833088000?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 13, 2020, 01:52:31 PM
https://twitter.com/iamcardib/status/1216586012576636928?s=21


I mean... probably?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 13, 2020, 01:56:51 PM
https://twitter.com/iamcardib/status/1216586012576636928?s=21


I mean... probably?

deadass is a verb?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 13, 2020, 01:59:31 PM
https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1216452341819486209?s=21

Wonder where the kid learned this
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 13, 2020, 02:02:22 PM
https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1216452341819486209?s=21

Wonder where the kid learned this

SBT Cardi B
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 13, 2020, 04:53:32 PM


Wonder where the kid learned this

That's literally the right wing mockery retort of the actual concern about irreversible climate change. Literally no democrat or leftist is saying the world will end in 2030.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 13, 2020, 04:53:43 PM
deadass is a verb?
It's an adverb.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 13, 2020, 05:26:17 PM
It's an adverb.
But why?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 13, 2020, 08:16:32 PM

That's literally the right wing mockery retort of the actual concern about irreversible climate change. Literally no democrat or leftist is saying the world will end in 2030.

AOC literally said it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 13, 2020, 08:18:03 PM
By the way, my facebook wall has become an absolute freaking warzone over bail reform. Private attorneys, legal aid attorneys, common citizens just going freaking ham on each other over this.

FWIW, I think the discovery measures were absolutely necessary given what goes on on this God forsaken island (ADA's never come across Brady material that they don't try and hide), but there is such a thing as going too far.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 14, 2020, 04:51:10 AM
AOC literally said it.
Ok boomer
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 28, 2020, 07:22:09 AM
Quote
@PAAttorneyGen: No one should be able to just 3D-print themselves a gun.
 
Didn't think that need to be said, but apparently, it does...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 28, 2020, 04:24:04 PM
3D printing a gun is a God-given right. It's in the bible. Look it up, libs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 28, 2020, 04:24:41 PM
3D printing a gun is a God-given right. It's in the bible. Look it up, libs.
Only if printed in ketchup
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 28, 2020, 05:52:08 PM
https://twitter.com/joeysalads/status/1222243226876182528?s=21

Uh
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 28, 2020, 05:56:00 PM
https://twitter.com/joeysalads/status/1222243226876182528?s=21

Uh

Not sure who that is but with a name like Saladino he's presumably Italian, which makes North African heritage to some degree far from uncommon. And North African is more likely to mean Arab than black.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 28, 2020, 06:34:01 PM
Not sure who that is but with a name like Saladino he's presumably Italian, which makes North African heritage to some degree far from uncommon. And North African is more likely to mean Arab than black.

It's only a short swim from Sicily to Ethiopia
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 28, 2020, 09:20:46 PM
Reminder that Joey Salads peed in his mouth
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 02, 2020, 11:20:44 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/sports.yahoo.com/amphtml/president-trump-congratulates-chiefs-for-repping-kansas-but-they-play-in-missouri-033427448.html

This bafoon
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 03, 2020, 06:49:20 AM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/sports.yahoo.com/amphtml/president-trump-congratulates-chiefs-for-repping-kansas-but-they-play-in-missouri-033427448.html

This bafoon
..
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200203/6d2a64560d7d1b9099ef6d75d3079cc9.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on February 03, 2020, 06:24:59 PM
Now this is elite representation

https://twitter.com/natalie_allison/status/1224481603570872320
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 03, 2020, 07:24:01 PM
Now this is elite representation

https://twitter.com/natalie_allison/status/1224481603570872320

I was about to call this guy a psychopath then I saw the crackers. This guy knows how to snack
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 04, 2020, 08:28:05 PM
Lol.

Quote
Who’s that lawmaker? AND WHY IS CASH COMING OUT OF HIS POCKET LIKE HE’S FRONT ROW AT A GENTLEMAN’S CLUB?! #SOTU https://t.co/yMX44ikrUC
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 04, 2020, 08:52:07 PM
Rush Limbaugh is such a piece of excrement, it's a disgrace that he is being awarded the presidential medal of freedom
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 04, 2020, 09:01:22 PM
Rush Limbaugh is such a piece of excrement, it's a disgrace that he is being awarded the presidential medal of freedom

Rush is the freaking man.

The amount of slander he's subject to is typical.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 04, 2020, 09:35:18 PM
Rush is the freaking man.

The amount of slander he's subject to is typical.

Rush on nicotine:
“There is no conclusive proof that nicotine’s addictive... And the same thing with cigarettes causing emphysema, lung cancer, heart disease.”

Rush on the genocide of American Indians:
“Columbus saved the Indians from themselves.”

Rush on Michael J Fox having parkinsons disease:
"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease. He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act... This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting."

Rush on African Americans voting:
“[African Americans] are twelve percent of the population. Who the hell cares?”

Rush on the NFL:
“Look, let me put it to you this way: the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it.”

Rush on global warming:
“If you believe in God, then intellectually you cannot believe in man-made global warming."

Rush on global warming 2:
"Global warming relies on the theory that we are destroying ecosystems. There is no evidence that we could destroy ecosystems."

Rush on global warming 3:
"For years I’ve pointed out that global warming is bogus."

Rush on feeding poor children in public school:
“If you feed them, if you feed the children, three square meals a day during the school year, how can you expect them to feed themselves in the summer? Wanton little waifs and serfs dependent on the State. Pure and simple.”

Rush on a 13 year old girl:
"Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is also a White House dog?” (Rush Limbaugh, while holding up a photograph of 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton)

Rush on exercise:
“Exercise freaks … are the ones putting stress on the health care system.”

Rush on feminism:
"Feminism has led women astray. I love the women’s movement — especially when walking behind it.”

Rush on LGBT:
“When a gay person turns his back on you, it is anything but an insult; it’s an invitation.”

Rush on people in the military who didn't support the Iraq War:
"The phony soldiers."

Rush on women:

"Women still live longer than men because their lives are easier."

Rush on women protesting sexual harassment:
“They’re out there protesting what they actually wish would happen to them sometimes.”

Rush on the homeless population:

"Isn't that how the homeless became homeless? They used to be institutionalized and a bunch of liberals came along and said, "They have rights! You can't keep them there"?"

Rush on the heterosexuality:
"Heterosexuality may be 95, 98 percent of the population. [Heterosexuality is] under assault by the 2 to 5 percent that are homosexual.”

Rush on legalizing gay marriage:
I simply asked you to think what was your first reaction when you heard first about gay marriage? And I said you’re probably having the same reaction here. And gay marriage is now standard, normal operating procedure. [Pedophilia] could be, too.

Rush on what criminals look like:

"Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?”.

Rush on Sandra Fluke who testified that women should have access to affordable contraceptives:
"It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps. (interruption) The johns? We would be the johns?

This is the presidential medal of freedom winner
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 04, 2020, 09:40:34 PM
Rush on nicotine:
“There is no conclusive proof that nicotine’s addictive... And the same thing with cigarettes causing emphysema, lung cancer, heart disease.”

Rush on the genocide of American Indians:
“Columbus saved the Indians from themselves.”

Rush on Michael J Fox having parkinsons disease:
"He is exaggerating the effects of the disease. He's moving all around and shaking and it's purely an act... This is really shameless of Michael J. Fox. Either he didn't take his medication or he's acting."

Rush on African Americans voting:
“[African Americans] are twelve percent of the population. Who the hell cares?”

Rush on the NFL:
“Look, let me put it to you this way: the NFL all too often looks like a game between the Bloods and the Crips without any weapons. There, I said it.”

Rush on global warming:
“If you believe in God, then intellectually you cannot believe in man-made global warming."

Rush on global warming 2:
"Global warming relies on the theory that we are destroying ecosystems. There is no evidence that we could destroy ecosystems."

Rush on global warming 3:
"For years I’ve pointed out that global warming is bogus."

Rush on feeding poor children in public school:
“If you feed them, if you feed the children, three square meals a day during the school year, how can you expect them to feed themselves in the summer? Wanton little waifs and serfs dependent on the State. Pure and simple.”

Rush on a 13 year old girl:
"Socks is the White House cat. But did you know there is also a White House dog?” (Rush Limbaugh, while holding up a photograph of 13-year-old Chelsea Clinton)

Rush on exercise:
“Exercise freaks … are the ones putting stress on the health care system.”

Rush on feminism:
"Feminism has led women astray. I love the women’s movement — especially when walking behind it.”

Rush on LGBT:
“When a gay person turns his back on you, it is anything but an insult; it’s an invitation.”

Rush on people in the military who didn't support the Iraq War:
"The phony soldiers."

Rush on women:

"Women still live longer than men because their lives are easier."

Rush on women protesting sexual harassment:
“They’re out there protesting what they actually wish would happen to them sometimes.”

Rush on the homeless population:

"Isn't that how the homeless became homeless? They used to be institutionalized and a bunch of liberals came along and said, "They have rights! You can't keep them there"?"

Rush on the heterosexuality:
"Heterosexuality may be 95, 98 percent of the population. [Heterosexuality is] under assault by the 2 to 5 percent that are homosexual.”

Rush on legalizing gay marriage:
I simply asked you to think what was your first reaction when you heard first about gay marriage? And I said you’re probably having the same reaction here. And gay marriage is now standard, normal operating procedure. [Pedophilia] could be, too.

Rush on what criminals look like:

"Have you ever noticed how all composite pictures of wanted criminals resemble Jesse Jackson?”.

Rush on Sandra Fluke who testified that women should have access to affordable contraceptives:
"It makes her a slut, right? It makes her a prostitute. She wants to be paid to have sex. She's having so much sex she can't afford the contraception. She wants you and me and the taxpayers to pay her to have sex. What does that make us? We're the pimps. (interruption) The johns? We would be the johns?

This is the presidential medal of freedom winner

Lmao where'd that come from, Media Matters?

Yeah, sorry. Most of that excrement is benign compared to the vitriol that comes out of TheRoot, Jacobin, Salon, etc.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 04, 2020, 09:51:05 PM
Lmao where'd that come from, Media Matters?

Yeah, sorry. Most of that excrement is benign compared to the vitriol that comes out of TheRoot, Jacobin, Salon, etc.

X person isnt bad because y person is worse.

Great logic

These are quotes from rush limbaugh.  The dude is a POS.  There are other publications which may also support pieces of excrement, but that doesnt change the fact that Rush Limbaugh is indeed a huge freaking piece of excrement.

Also, let's clarify here.  This is not a comedian, his job is to deliver and comment on the news, and he is being celebrated for his biggoted views.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 04, 2020, 09:59:15 PM
X person isnt bad because y person is worse.

Great logic

These are quotes from rush limbaugh.  The dude is a POS.  There are other publications which may also support pieces of excrement, but that doesnt change the fact that Rush Limbaugh is indeed a huge freaking piece of excrement.

Also, let's clarify here.  This is not a comedian, his job is to deliver and comment on the news, and he is being celebrated for his biggoted views.

This absolutely is a comedian, Rush has never presented himself as a journalist.

Nice job trying to strawman his views from some objectionable things you've cherrypicked over THIRTY years, I'm sure you'd do the same thing to Stern or anyone else in his position.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 04, 2020, 10:29:40 PM
This absolutely is a comedian, Rush has never presented himself as a journalist.

Nice job trying to strawman his views from some objectionable things you've cherrypicked over THIRTY years, I'm sure you'd do the same thing to Stern or anyone else in his position.
First rebuttal - hes not a piece of excrement because there are people who are worse

Second rebuttal - he's not a piece of excrement because this is only his POV on 19 different topics.  If you looked at 10 or so other you'd clearly see hes a good guy who is misunderstood


Per wikipedia: political conservative commentator
Per his website:
"America's Anchorman"

Rush Limbaugh, the “Doctor of Democracy,” is known as the pioneer of AM radio. Limbaugh revolutionized the media and political landscape with his unprecedented combination of serious discussion of political, cultural and social issues along with satirical and biting humor, which parodies previously “untouchable” personalities and topics.

Yes he has bits, but he's none for conservative discussions about current events.

Howard Stern isnt a political commentator.  He talks about politics, but is a comedian.  When HS is introduced on talk shows no one is calling him a political commentator.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 05, 2020, 12:50:26 AM
I wouldn't pee on the piece of excrement Limbaugh if he was on fire. Freaking guy was against drug users and he's popping 100 pills a day the biggest lying hypocrite in this country freak him. He's a freaking joke.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 05, 2020, 01:01:54 AM
Also some one should find the copy of the State of the Union and make that disgusting queynte eat every page she ripped up and maybe give that stupid queynte seconds. My god I wanted to break my tv screen watching that queynte sit behind the President. You may not like the President, he's tough to like but show some respect you dumb hateful bitch, my god you're a congresswoman have some freaking respect for the office, show some courtesy. Especially when the entire world is watching.. My god do I hate Pelosi.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on February 05, 2020, 05:15:16 AM
Also some one should find the copy of the State of the Union and make that disgusting queynte eat every page she ripped up and maybe give that stupid queynte seconds. My god I wanted to break my tv screen watching that queynte sit behind the President. You may not like the President, he's tough to like but show some respect you dumb hateful bitch, my god you're a congresswoman have some freaking respect for the office, show some courtesy. Especially when the entire world is watching.. My god do I hate Pelosi.

all she is good for is empty acts and gestures that become useless gifs

she rips up paper or claps all passive aggressive. cool beans, you're so cool. actually do something bitch
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 05, 2020, 06:43:42 AM
all she is good for is empty acts and gestures that become useless gifs

she rips up paper or claps all passive aggressive. cool beans, you're so cool. actually do something bitch

Agree the paper ripping was in called for and disrespectful.

I also thought the way the gop acted was disrespectful.  Support your party, support your president, but this is Congress not the superbowl.  The chants and yelling was over the top and lacked respect for govt
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 05, 2020, 08:22:11 AM
I wouldn't pee on the piece of excrement Limbaugh if he was on fire. Freaking guy was against drug users and he's popping 100 pills a day the biggest lying hypocrite in this country freak him. He's a freaking joke.

Ok, so he's a hypocrite. Him and literally 99.9 percent of the rest of us.

Agree the paper ripping was in called for and disrespectful.

I also thought the way the gop acted was disrespectful.  Support your party, support your president, but this is Congress not the superbowl.  The chants and yelling was over the top and lacked respect for govt


The chants and yelling are par for the course no matter who the President is. It's not atypical.

As for Pelosi, she literally ripped apart a speech that spoke of black and hispanic financial advancement and cited American heroes in the audience such as Charles McGee. That is...so bewildering because its not a move that's going to endear herself to anyone but the vocal minority. A huge miscalculation imho. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 05, 2020, 08:38:22 AM
Ok, so he's a hypocrite. Him and literally 99.9 percent of the rest of us.


The chants and yelling are par for the course no matter who the President is. It's not atypical.

As for Pelosi, she literally ripped apart a speech that spoke of black and hispanic financial advancement and cited American heroes in the audience such as Charles McGee. That is...so bewildering because its not a move that's going to endear herself to anyone but the vocal minority. A huge miscalculation imho.

Defense #1- There are people who are worse

Defense #2 - This is only his POV on 19 different topics.  If you looked at 10 or so other you'd clearly see hes a good guy who is misunderstood

Defense #3 - He does the same thing everyone else does

It is funny because these are the same defenses you hear for Trump.

I also want to clarify my position
1.  Someone can be entertaining and be a bad person.  i.e. Athletes don't need to be role models
2.  Liking someone that is a bad person, doesn't make you a bad person.  I'm not attacking your character.
These things are not mutually exclusive

The chants and yelling are par for the course no matter who the President is. It's not atypical.
I'm really curious about this.  I'll probably look at an old obama or bush state of the union over the weekend to see if this is true.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 05, 2020, 08:47:29 AM
Defense #1- There are people who are worse

Defense #2 - This is only his POV on 19 different topics.  If you looked at 10 or so other you'd clearly see hes a good guy who is misunderstood

Defense #3 - He does the same thing everyone else does

It is funny because these are the same defenses you hear for Trump.

I also want to clarify my position
1.  Someone can be entertaining and be a bad person.  i.e. Athletes don't need to be role models
2.  Liking someone that is a bad person, doesn't make you a bad person.  I'm not attacking your character.
These things are not mutually exclusive
I'm really curious about this.  I'll probably look at an old obama or bush state of the union over the weekend to see if this is true.


Regarding defense #1 and #2, you keep misinterpreting the point, but this is what happens when you regurgitate this approach of taking the most offensive things someone has said (usually in jest) over a thirty year career and judging him on that basis no matter how anomalous they are of his stated beliefs.

The fact is, the same people who are castigating Rush as a racist have no problem sharing the latest racist drivel from Michael Harriot, Neera Tandeen, etc. That's not a "there are people who are worse" defense, that's a highlight of how the outrage is completely selective. Puck made a good point about the guys hypocrisy when it came to addiction-having lived with an addict, they're all hypocrites. It's part of the disease (and I do subscribe to the idea that addiction is a disease). Most non-addicts are hypocrites too.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 05, 2020, 08:58:51 AM
Regarding defense #1 and #2, you keep misinterpreting the point, but this is what happens when you regurgitate this approach of taking the most offensive things someone has said (usually in jest) over a thirty year career and judging him on that basis no matter how anomalous they are of his stated beliefs.

The fact is, the same people who are castigating Rush as a racist have no problem sharing the latest racist drivel from Michael Harriot, Neera Tandeen, etc. That's not a "there are people who are worse" defense, that's a highlight of how the outrage is completely selective. Puck made a good point about the guys hypocrisy when it came to addiction-having lived with an addict, they're all hypocrites. It's part of the disease (and I do subscribe to the idea that addiction is a disease). Most non-addicts are hypocrites too.
I understand argument, but I disagree that someone supporting something negative negates their ability to call someone else out on their bullshit.  Or better stated, person 2s actions doesn't delegitimize (word?) the actions that person 1 did.  Rush still said these things throughout his career.
 
Its also worth noting, and this is my main point, Michael Harriot, Neera Tandeen, and whomever else, didn't get the Presidential medal of freedom.  Rush Limbaugh did.

I'm calling Rush out strictly for the reason of him winning the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

To further clarify, I, insanity, the one pushing this argument, is not promoting racist rhetoric on one side while also saying Rush is a POS.  This argument exists in a vacuum.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 05, 2020, 09:37:56 AM
Ok, so he's a hypocrite. Him and literally 99.9 percent of the rest of us.


The chants and yelling are par for the course no matter who the President is. It's not atypical.

As for Pelosi, she literally ripped apart a speech that spoke of black and hispanic financial advancement and cited American heroes in the audience such as Charles McGee. That is...so bewildering because its not a move that's going to endear herself to anyone but the vocal minority. A huge miscalculation imho. 


There's a big difference to what he has been doing as a hypocrite versus us here. He deserves a beating to an inch of his life but stage 4 lung cancer will suffice. The good thing is he can take lots and lots of pain pills.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 05, 2020, 09:59:40 AM
I understand argument, but I disagree that someone supporting something negative negates their ability to call someone else out on their bullshit.  Or better stated, person 2s actions doesn't delegitimize (word?) the actions that person 1 did.  Rush still said these things throughout his career.
 
Its also worth noting, and this is my main point, Michael Harriot, Neera Tandeen, and whomever else, didn't get the Presidential medal of freedom.  Rush Limbaugh did.

I'm calling Rush out strictly for the reason of him winning the Presidential Medal of Freedom.

To further clarify, I, insanity, the one pushing this argument, is not promoting racist rhetoric on one side while also saying Rush is a POS.  This argument exists in a vacuum.

You do realize though, this method of retroactively parsing through every single statement made by a notable radio/podcast host is exactly how people are content to call Rogan a racist, anti-trans bla bla bla.

Also, I gotta note, the last President handed a Presidential Medal of Freedom to someone who literally vocalized her belief that race relations in this country won't improve until old white people die.

I know politifact (lol) is going to rate that claim as false because "she didn't overtly say white people" or some such excrement they usually say to justify their bias, but if we're reviewing statements from public figures here, a precedent was set.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 05, 2020, 10:18:49 AM
You do realize though, this method of retroactively parsing through every single statement made by a notable radio/podcast host is exactly how people are content to call Rogan a racist, anti-trans bla bla bla.

Also, I gotta note, the last President handed a Presidential Medal of Freedom to someone who literally vocalized her belief that race relations in this country won't improve until old white people die.

I know politifact (lol) is going to rate that claim as false because "she didn't overtly say white people" or some such excrement they usually say to justify their bias, but if we're reviewing statements from public figures here, a precedent was set.

I agree that you cherry picking is a recipe for disaster.  We all have said things we regret.

I for one hold political commentators to a higher standard than comedians like Joe Rogan.
Additionally we're not cherrypicking 1, 2, or 3 things.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 05, 2020, 10:25:01 AM
Jesus freaking Christ. I really never thought I'd have to watch someone defend Rush freaking Limbaugh on this freaking site. Let's defend Alex Jones while we're at it because there's got to be someone who leans left who is a complete waste of skin too.

I almost literally threw up in my mouth.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 05, 2020, 10:30:09 AM
Jesus freaking Christ. I really never thought I'd have to watch someone defend Rush freaking Limbaugh on this freaking site. Let's defend Alex Jones while we're at it because there's got to be someone who leans left who is a complete waste of skin too.

I almost literally threw up in my mouth.

Your comparison of Limbaugh to Jones tells me pretty much all I need to know in terms of your knowledge of their respective careers.

One called Sandy Hook a hoax.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 05, 2020, 10:34:12 AM
the arguments about Gase are more interesting than this little slapfest over Limbaugh.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 05, 2020, 10:38:03 AM
the arguments about Gase are more interesting than this little slapfest over Limbaugh.

infinitely so.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 05, 2020, 10:39:18 AM
infinitely so.

Gase sucks derriere by the way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 05, 2020, 10:54:11 AM
Your comparison of Limbaugh to Jones tells me pretty much all I need to know in terms of your knowledge of their respective careers.

One called Sandy Hook a hoax.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (that's the way to do this, correct?)

My father listened to Rush for freaking years and it disgusted me. And yes, I compare Limbaugh to Alex Jones. Science says climate change is real. In just the stuff insanity posted, he denied the science multiple times. He also denied nicotine's addictive properties. He utilizes emotion under the guise of a "conservative" platform to sell himself as a product.

No, there's no similarity at all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on February 05, 2020, 10:59:43 AM
Jesus freaking Christ. I really never thought I'd have to watch someone defend Rush freaking Limbaugh on this freaking site. Let's defend Alex Jones while we're at it because there's got to be someone who leans left who is a complete waste of skin too.

I almost literally threw up in my mouth.

I would like to defend Alex Jones:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Yj5ec0pS1XI
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9JRLCBb7qK8
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 05, 2020, 11:00:43 AM
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA (that's the way to do this, correct?)

My father listened to Rush for freaking years and it disgusted me. And yes, I compare Limbaugh to Alex Jones. Science says climate change is real. In just the stuff insanity posted, he denied the science multiple times. He also denied nicotine's addictive properties. He utilizes emotion under the guise of a "conservative" platform to sell himself as a product.

No, there's no similarity at all.

Lmao, I do do that.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 05, 2020, 11:31:53 AM
I think any half intelligent person can agree that the more political a person is, the greater the likelihood is that they're either a psychopath or gigantic piece of excrement

This applies to spectators, media personalities, and well politicians.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on February 05, 2020, 11:32:49 AM

One called Sandy Hook a hoax.

STOP PARSING THROUGH EVERYTHING ALEX JONES HAS EVER SAID OVER THE YEARS AND CHERRY-PICKING ONE NEGATIVE THING, HE'S AN ENTERTAINER AND COMEDIAN NOT A JOURNALIST SMH.




/s
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 05, 2020, 11:37:06 AM
Lmao where'd that come from, Media Matters?

Yeah, sorry. Most of that excrement is benign compared to the vitriol that comes out of TheRoot, Jacobin, Salon, etc.
Funniest post you've ever made
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 05, 2020, 11:37:55 AM


Also some one should find the copy of the State of the Union and make that disgusting queynte eat every page she ripped up and maybe give that stupid queynte seconds. My god I wanted to break my tv screen watching that queynte sit behind the President. You may not like the President, he's tough to like but show some respect you dumb hateful bitch, my god you're a congresswoman have some freaking respect for the office, show some courtesy. Especially when the entire world is watching.. My god do I hate Pelosi.

You lose for caring this much
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 05, 2020, 12:02:15 PM

You lose for caring this much
He's just mad because she's geriatric thicc
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 05, 2020, 12:14:32 PM
He's just mad because she's geriatric thicc

And now I actually did throw up in my mouth
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 05, 2020, 12:19:19 PM
Baby Mexican jail: I sleep

Lady tear paper: real excrement
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on February 05, 2020, 12:55:01 PM
Thought Pelosi looked immature ripping up the speech. Can see that gesture backfiring on the Democratic Party. The sore loser campaign will continue until Trumps re-election it seems.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 05, 2020, 01:06:21 PM
STOP PARSING THROUGH EVERYTHING ALEX JONES HAS EVER SAID OVER THE YEARS AND CHERRY-PICKING ONE NEGATIVE THING, HE'S AN ENTERTAINER AND COMEDIAN NOT A JOURNALIST SMH.




/s

The comparison is ridiculous.

Baby Mexican jail: I sleep

Lady tear paper: real excrement

At least you didn't classify it as a concentration camp but its still an absurd classification.


Aaaaaaand given the breaking news, I feel so freaking justified in not voting for Romney.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on February 05, 2020, 02:20:38 PM
The comparison is ridiculous.


Which is literally something an Alex fan would say to a comparison with a media figure they happened to disagree with. The comparison is ridiculous because you happen to think it is as someone who believes Rush is The Man, not because Rush happens to be more popular for more years.

Rush is an enormously successful and influential radio legend, I have no disagreement. I wouldn't necessarily disagree with the argument that Howard Stern and Rush are the 2 dominant figures in talk radio over the last 30 years or so (off the top of my head, maybe Im missing someone).
Alex Jones also has an ardent, loyal following. He has also had great success and built himself a media empire, albeit not on the scale of Rush. He is also influential to a great many Americans. You (and most thinking, empathetic, non-shitty people) were likely offended by his Sandy Hook nonsense, pandering to his conspiracy-swallowing base. Just like many millions have been offended by some of Rush's comically misogynistic and racist and asinine comments. Rush is playing a character to his base and pandering to them as much as Alex. Both are cartoonish. Both are adored by the current President (who is the embodiment of both of their respective bases, remarkably).

You cherry-picking a comment from Jones that you disagreed with and found offensive is very similar someone cherry-picking something gross that offended them from Rush. Both men are hypocrites, and both are pieces of excrement who have said outrageous, shitty things to be hurtful. I have ZERO doubt that Trump would also award Alex Jones the Medal of Freedom next time he wants to trollololol the left.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 05, 2020, 02:24:37 PM
Which is literally something an Alex fan would say to a comparison with a media figure they happened to disagree with. The comparison is ridiculous because you happen to think it is as someone who believes Rush is The Man, not because Rush happens to be more popular for more years.

Rush is an enormously successful and influential radio legend, I have no disagreement. I wouldn't necessarily disagree with the argument that Howard Stern and Rush are the 2 dominant figures in talk radio over the last 30 years or so (off the top of my head, maybe Im missing someone).
Alex Jones also has an ardent, loyal following. He has also had great success and built himself a media empire, albeit not on the scale of Rush. He is also influential to a great many Americans. You (and most thinking, empathetic, non-shitty people) were likely offended by his Sandy Hook nonsense, pandering to his conspiracy-swallowing base. Just like many millions have been offended by some of Rush's comically misogynistic and racist and asinine comments. Rush is playing a character to his base and pandering to them as much as Alex. Both are cartoonish. Both are adored by the current President (who is the embodiment of both of their respective bases, remarkably).

You cherry-picking a comment from Jones that you disagreed with and found offensive is very similar someone cherry-picking something gross that offended them from Rush. Both men are hypocrites, and both are pieces of excrement who have said outrageous, shitty things to be hurtful. I have ZERO doubt that Trump would also award Alex Jones the Medal of Freedom next time he wants to trollololol the left.

But how are they even remotely the same?!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 05, 2020, 02:31:24 PM
Which is literally something an Alex fan would say to a comparison with a media figure they happened to disagree with. The comparison is ridiculous because you happen to think it is as someone who believes Rush is The Man, not because Rush happens to be more popular for more years.

Rush is an enormously successful and influential radio legend, I have no disagreement. I wouldn't necessarily disagree with the argument that Howard Stern and Rush are the 2 dominant figures in talk radio over the last 30 years or so (off the top of my head, maybe Im missing someone).
Alex Jones also has an ardent, loyal following. He has also had great success and built himself a media empire, albeit not on the scale of Rush. He is also influential to a great many Americans. You (and most thinking, empathetic, non-shitty people) were likely offended by his Sandy Hook nonsense, pandering to his conspiracy-swallowing base. Just like many millions have been offended by some of Rush's comically misogynistic and racist and asinine comments. Rush is playing a character to his base and pandering to them as much as Alex. Both are cartoonish. Both are adored by the current President (who is the embodiment of both of their respective bases, remarkably).

You cherry-picking a comment from Jones that you disagreed with and found offensive is very similar someone cherry-picking something gross that offended them from Rush. Both men are hypocrites, and both are pieces of excrement who have said outrageous, shitty things to be hurtful. I have ZERO doubt that Trump would also award Alex Jones the Medal of Freedom next time he wants to trollololol the left.

Ok. Give me a list of pundits you enjoy and I guarantee I can find offensive commentary. This outrage is selective horseshit because he espouses a conservative worldview. Period.

As I said earlier, this retroactive parsing of people's comments throughout their career is how we get people trying to get Bernie Sanders to disavow Rogan's endorsement. It's absurd.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on February 05, 2020, 02:54:20 PM
Ok. Give me a list of pundits you enjoy and I guarantee I can find offensive commentary.

Oh, no doubt. Anyone can find anything to be offended by from anyone, especially those who disagree with their current political worldview. Thanks for reinforcing my point!


This outrage is selective horseshit because he espouses a conservative worldview. Period.

I don't necessarily disagree. Part of the outrage is because the Medal was given by Trump, a president disliked by most of the populace. Many Americans automatically assume the President is trolling them and antagonizing them with many of his comments and tweets and stunts. Giving Rush the Medal during the SOTU was an obvious stunt to poke the left in the eye, that's obvious right? It was meant to annoy/outrage millions of Americans, let's be intellectually honest.



As I said earlier, this retroactive parsing of people's comments throughout their career is how we get people trying to get Bernie Sanders to disavow Rogan's endorsement. It's absurd.

Yes, I agree. The manufactured Rogan/Sanders "outrage" is absurd and frustrating. It has nothing to do with my original post, but again, we agree.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 05, 2020, 03:07:01 PM

I don't necessarily disagree. Part of the outrage is because the Medal was given by Trump, a president disliked by most of the populace. Many Americans automatically assume the President is trolling them and antagonizing them with many of his comments and tweets and stunts. Giving Rush the Medal during the SOTU was an obvious stunt to poke the left in the eye, that's obvious right? It was meant to annoy/outrage millions of Americans, let's be intellectually honest.


I'm torn between thinking how much of the timing was a "freak you" to the usual suspects as opposed to a display to his supporters that he doesn't give a excrement what the other side thinks; he'll back "their guys." In other words the direct opposite of your motive that he was trolling the left as opposed to offering support to the right. The motivation probably comes from both places.

As immature as this attitude is, if it gets the Joy Behar's the Chris Cuomo's the Jennifer Rubin's of the world angry, good. These people view me with contempt. Rick Wilson and Don Lemon's little exchange was indicative of the wider attitude that this unelected aristocracy of elites in this country have towards anyone who doesn't fall in line with their worldview to be lorded over.

I might very well be a freaking rube, its a distinct possibility. But I know a lot of people who voted for Trump who have done more for the greater societal good in one day than people like Rick Wilson Steve Schmidt and Jennifer Rubin have ever contributed in their life.

If it was the latter, even better. There's a spin cycle and a narrative machine that's going to do what they do no matter what. For too long, certain politicians have (and some still do) governed their actions on the basis that its' possible to, if not win these people over, at least gain respectability in their eyes. It's impossible. John Kasich can say whatever he wants about unity and principled governance, the Matt Yglesias's of the world are still going to hate him because he's not progressive. Mitt did what he did today, and he'll get his book deal and go on his redemption tour. 8 years ago the same voices who are now bending over backwards to kiss his derriere (lol) tried to directly tie him to someones death because of a Bain Capitol takeover. It's one giant grift.

This idea that Trump is disliked by the general populace when even the historically oversampled Gallup poll has him polling at 49% doesn't match up with reality. I'm as confident in his re-election as I was that Obama was going to destroy Romney. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 05, 2020, 11:05:38 PM
This is now the world we live in

https://www.instagram.com/p/B8MnQ3flAy-/?utm_source=ig_embed&ig_mid=2B10DDEF-2226-446B-A905-BFF6DCC10468

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 05, 2020, 11:17:16 PM
I think any half intelligent person can agree that the more political a person is, the greater the likelihood is that they're either a psychopath or gigantic piece of excrement

This applies to spectators, media personalities, and well politicians.

Without a doubt the most intelligent thing you've ever said on the board.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 06, 2020, 05:56:15 AM
Lol.

Quote
BREAKING: I'm filing an ethics complaint against @SpeakerPelosi for destroying @realDonaldTrump's State of the Union speech.

Her conduct was beneath the dignity of the House, and a potential violation of law (18 USC 2071).

Nobody is above the law. She must be held accountable. https://t.co/dXPPWQNtI8
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 07, 2020, 11:17:30 AM
Without a doubt the most intelligent thing you've ever said on the board.
It was also a completely unintelligent statement but you could technically not be wrong. Dcm just wants to justify being a dipshit centrist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 07, 2020, 11:34:35 AM
It was also a completely unintelligent statement but you could technically not be wrong. Dcm just wants to justify being a dipshit centrist.

EvErYoNE wHo DoEsN'T fOlLoW ReGrEsSivE LeftISt DoGmA iS A dIpsHiT CeNtRiSt.

When did you guys get as insane as the religious right of the early 00's with the purity tests?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 07, 2020, 09:12:22 PM
EvErYoNE wHo DoEsN'T fOlLoW ReGrEsSivE LeftISt DoGmA iS A dIpsHiT CeNtRiSt.

When did you guys get as insane as the religious right of the early 00's with the purity tests?
You don't have to be any sort of ideological purist to point out a useless centrist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 07, 2020, 09:14:37 PM
"I'm sorry, are you suggesting I should care about anything? Form a political opinion based on someone else's material needs or basic moral decency? Nah brah, I already get all the opinions i need from South Park." -dcm
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 11, 2020, 05:42:24 PM
2 more election security bills dead.

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/482569-senate-gop-blocks-three-election-security-bills?amp
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 11, 2020, 05:48:04 PM
"I'm sorry, are you suggesting I should care about anything? Form a political opinion based on someone else's material needs or basic moral decency? Nah brah, I already get all the opinions i need from South Park." -dcm

Millenials and their crushes on Bernie

So cute

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 11, 2020, 07:06:12 PM
Millenials and their crushes on Bernie

So cute
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200212/d01fd67ddb5c864c2ebf20ed2095e78b.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 11, 2020, 08:12:10 PM
I'm excited to hear MJs explanation as to why Roger Stone should be pardoned
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 11, 2020, 08:31:25 PM
I'm excited to hear MJs explanation as to why Roger Stone should be pardoned
"Well of course you'd think Roger Stone is literally Hitler if you just read DailyKos all day"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 11, 2020, 10:33:44 PM
I'm excited to hear MJs explanation as to why Roger Stone should be pardoned

"Pardoned"

Yeah, that's what happened.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 12, 2020, 08:57:22 AM
Lol @ the idea Republicans had that the "scar of impeachment" would temper Trump. The star of The Apprentice will somehow be forgiving of people who--under subpoena--testify against him, or not reward someone who helps him?

The GOP doesn't give two fucks about this country. Of course, they're killing election security bills. They've gerrymandered the excrement out of the country and so far, any "alleged" interference has benefitted their party. Why do anything to slow that "progress"?

*In before someone says "Russian interference is a hoax", or some excuse about voting districts being justified, or Obama-something-something, or some excrement about how liberals are just as bad and stop listening to left-slanted media.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 12, 2020, 09:19:34 AM
Lol @ the idea Republicans had that the "scar of impeachment" would temper Trump. The star of The Apprentice will somehow be forgiving of people who--under subpoena--testify against him, or not reward someone who helps him?

The GOP doesn't give two fucks about this country. Of course, they're killing election security bills. They've gerrymandered the excrement out of the country and so far, any "alleged" interference has benefitted their party. Why do anything to slow that "progress"?

*In before someone says "Russian interference is a hoax", or some excuse about voting districts being justified, or Obama-something-something, or some excrement about how liberals are just as bad and stop listening to left-slanted media.

I missed the part where republicans voted for impeachment
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 12, 2020, 09:20:33 AM
I missed the part where republicans voted for impeachment

How dare those evil senate republicans act in a partisan manner regarding something that got through the house with absolutely zero bi-partisan support!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 12, 2020, 10:07:34 AM
Lol @ the idea Republicans had that the "scar of impeachment" would temper Trump. The star of The Apprentice will somehow be forgiving of people who--under subpoena--testify against him, or not reward someone who helps him?

The GOP doesn't give two fucks about this country. Of course, they're killing election security bills. They've gerrymandered the excrement out of the country and so far, any "alleged" interference has benefitted their party. Why do anything to slow that "progress"?

*In before someone says "Russian interference is a hoax", or some excuse about voting districts being justified, or Obama-something-something, or some excrement about how liberals are just as bad and stop listening to left-slanted media.

Neither party gives a excrement about this country

That's how Trump came to exist. And why the democrats are force feeding Hillary Clinton last year and Biden/Warren down peoples throats even though nobody freaking wants them.

Both political parties are completely out of touch with American values
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 12, 2020, 11:24:45 AM
I missed the part where republicans voted for impeachment

I know the news is biased and not worth your time, but Senate Republicans have told reporters that they thought the stain of the impeachment process--even with the acquittal--would be enough to temper Trump's personality. Now they're shocked that it somehow didn't and has actually emboldened his behavior.

I know, I know. I should stop reading whatever ultralib website people seem to think all leftists get their news from, and disbelieve any story that speaks about "the opposite side" in any non-positive way. Because there must be an agenda there. There just must.

How dare those evil senate republicans act in a partisan manner regarding something that got through the house with absolutely zero bi-partisan support!

Yes, how dare anyone do their Constitutionally mandated jobs? And in a fair-and-impartial manner? I know, I know "But the libs were completely partisan in impeaching!!!!"

Except, Rubio literally claimed that just because Trump's actions were impeachable, doesn't mean they should have voted to remove him.

Quote
Sen. Marco Rubio (R-FL) published an article on Medium, Friday, claiming that just because President Donald Trump’s actions may be impeachable, he shouldn’t be removed because it would “inflict extraordinary and potentially irreparable damage” on the nation.

How dare anyone hold our representatives accountable to its laws?!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 12, 2020, 11:36:22 AM
I know the news is biased and not worth your time, but Senate Republicans have told reporters that they thought the stain of the impeachment process--even with the acquittal--would be enough to temper Trump's personality. Now they're shocked that it somehow didn't and has actually emboldened his behavior.

I know, I know. I should stop reading whatever ultralib website people seem to think all leftists get their news from, and disbelieve any story that speaks about "the opposite side" in any non-positive way. Because there must be an agenda there. There just must.

Yes, how dare anyone do their Constitutionally mandated jobs? And in a fair-and-impartial manner? I know, I know "But the libs were completely partisan in impeaching!!!!"

Except, Rubio literally claimed that just because Trump's actions were impeachable, doesn't mean they should have voted to remove him.

How dare anyone hold our representatives accountable to its laws?!

Yeah, I get that you like to completely ignore or discount anything that disrupts the precious narrative (such as factual information which directly contradicts your rhetoric on the tax cuts, Puerto Rico etc.) but we've already been through this. Rubio's stance has precedence and isn't unlike the stance that many Senate Democrats AND Republicans took when electing not to remove Bubba from office for flagrantly committing perjury (you know, an actual felony) because the damage to institutions like our electoral process and the Presidency itself isn't commiserate with the charge, or worth it.

"The libs" were completely partisan in impeaching. A once somber last resort has been turned into a hyper-political process that either party now has the precedence to engage in whenever the opposition is occupying the executive branch. If you don't think Cocaine Mitch is already salivating over the likelyhood of a Republican House eventually impeaching a Democratic President under flimsy pretenses, you haven't paid attention to how he's been able to take advantage of Harry Reid invoking the nuclear option re: judicial appointments.

"How dare we not usurp one election result, subvert another and disenfranchise 60 million plus over a bullshit pretense because this guy is going to skate to re-election!"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 13, 2020, 10:04:57 AM
I know the news is biased and not worth your time, but Senate Republicans have told reporters that they thought the stain of the impeachment process--even with the acquittal--would be enough to temper Trump's personality. Now they're shocked that it somehow didn't and has actually emboldened his behavior.

I know, I know. I should stop reading whatever ultralib website people seem to think all leftists get their news from, and disbelieve any story that speaks about "the opposite side" in any non-positive way. Because there must be an agenda there. There just must.

Yes, how dare anyone do their Constitutionally mandated jobs? And in a fair-and-impartial manner? I know, I know "But the libs were completely partisan in impeaching!!!!"

Except, Rubio literally claimed that just because Trump's actions were impeachable, doesn't mean they should have voted to remove him.

How dare anyone hold our representatives accountable to its laws?!

IMO, that’s a dumb talking point you got baited on. No republican actually thought that. And if they did they could put their money where their mouth is like Romney did.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 13, 2020, 10:23:22 AM
IMO, that’s a dumb talking point you got baited on. No republican actually thought that. And if they did they could put their money where their mouth is like Romney did.

Again, I know how you feel about the media, and it's cool. I'm not exactly a huge fan either.

But it keeps being reported by news outlets on both sides of the aisle. Which yes, I do read--that's how you keep some perspective. Of course, every story is slanted based on the storyteller.

It's like Adam Gase. If I read a Manish story about Gase, I'm going to jump on "anonymous quotes" that paint him in a dislikable light. Someone else, Heismanberg for example, is going to say "freak Manish, stop reading his bullshit."

Neither of us is totally right or wrong. Manish almost certainly has a source inside the org that said whatever he quoted. But given his attitude towards Gase, he's going to make mountains out of molehills.

It's no different from stories about Washington. WaPo's take on a Trump story is going to be vastly different than FOX News' take. But if both tell a story containing the same nuggets of info, i.e. Republican Senators being surprised at Trump's behavior post-impeachment, the chances are, there are actually GOP Senators who are surprised.

I read this morning that some GOP members are now surprised/worried about Trump trying to expand his war powers for Iran. Was I baited? FTR, I got that story from a right-slanted media outlet.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 13, 2020, 10:30:17 AM
Again, I know how you feel about the media, and it's cool. I'm not exactly a huge fan either.

But it keeps being reported by news outlets on both sides of the aisle. Which yes, I do read--that's how you keep some perspective. Of course, every story is slanted based on the storyteller.

It's like Adam Gase. If I read a Manish story about Gase, I'm going to jump on "anonymous quotes" that paint him in a dislikable light. Someone else, Heismanberg for example, is going to say "freak Manish, stop reading his bullshit."

Neither of us is totally right or wrong. Manish almost certainly has a source inside the org that said whatever he quoted. But given his attitude towards Gase, he's going to make mountains out of molehills.

It's no different from stories about Washington. WaPo's take on a Trump story is going to be vastly different than FOX News' take. But if both tell a story containing the same nuggets of info, i.e. Republican Senators being surprised at Trump's behavior post-impeachment, the chances are, there are actually GOP Senators who are surprised.

I read this morning that some GOP members are now surprised/worried about Trump trying to expand his war powers for Iran. Was I baited? FTR, I got that story from a right-slanted media outlet.

I don’t doubt that some republicans actually said that, but that’s them trying to save face or distance themselves from Trump. No one with a brain thought this impeachment was going to do anything other than send Trump on a rampage and invoke a zillion dumbass tweets
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 13, 2020, 10:40:37 AM
I'm excited to hear MJs explanation as to why Roger Stone should be pardoned

This aged well.

So we’re ok with apparent sham trials now?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 13, 2020, 11:01:43 AM
I don’t doubt that some republicans actually said that, but that’s them trying to save face or distance themselves from Trump. No one with a brain thought this impeachment was going to do anything other than send Trump on a rampage and invoke a zillion dumbass tweets

Sure, no one was disillusioned there.

But the concerning thing is firing very respected people for having the gall to comply with subpoenas, or his new attempts to expand the executive branch's war powers to get into a war with Iran, or his direct interference into the Stone trial. They didn't see that coming (or at least that's what they're saying to reporters).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 13, 2020, 11:14:43 AM
Sure, no one was disillusioned there.

But the concerning thing is firing very respected people for having the gall to comply with subpoenas, or his new attempts to expand the executive branch's war powers to get into a war with Iran, or his direct interference into the Stone trial. They didn't see that coming (or at least that's what they're saying to reporters).

I really don’t follow the news cycle that closely, but everything you described sounds like normal Trump business to me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 13, 2020, 11:25:30 AM


Again, I know how you feel about the media, and it's cool. I'm not exactly a huge fan either.

But it keeps being reported by news outlets on both sides of the aisle.

Both sides, the right and the center.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 13, 2020, 11:56:57 AM
This aged well.

So we’re ok with apparent sham trials now?
You're right all of the Jury members should have been Pro-Trump
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 13, 2020, 12:28:47 PM
No one with a brain thought this impeachment was going to do anything other than send Trump on a rampage and invoke a zillion dumbass tweets
Pretty much and that's what's wrong with the political process, no one gives three shits about logic and what's right. excrement you even see it in these threads, not pointing fingers at anyone in particular.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 13, 2020, 01:05:17 PM
Pretty much and that's what's wrong with the political process, no one gives three shits about logic and what's right. excrement you even see it in these threads, not pointing fingers at anyone in particular.
I'm not saying it was the right thing to do, but you're saying because the likelihood was that he wouldn't get impeached his actions should have been ignored?

Wrong is wrong.  If you want to argue it was a poor strategic decision I can understand that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 13, 2020, 01:08:28 PM
You're right all of the Jury members should have been Pro-Trump

Hey man, nice strawman!

I'm not saying it was the right thing to do, but you're saying because the likelihood was that he wouldn't get impeached his actions should have been ignored?

Wrong is wrong.  If you want to argue it was a poor strategic decision I can understand that.

"His actions" which of course were so violative of a law or constitutional clause that the impeachment charges failed to cite a law or constitutional clause that his actions violated.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 13, 2020, 01:18:28 PM
I really don’t follow the news cycle that closely, but everything you described sounds like normal Trump business to me.

Of course it is. Which is why the only thing that's actually shocking is that there were people who thought it would be any different. And that was my initial point before it went off the rails.

Having reviewed what I posted, I think I see where the confusion may have come from though:

Lol @ the idea Republicans had that the "scar of impeachment" would temper Trump. The star of The Apprentice will somehow be forgiving of people who--under subpoena--testify against him, or not reward someone who helps him?

The GOP doesn't give two fucks about this country. Of course, they're killing election security bills. They've gerrymandered the excrement out of the country and so far, any "alleged" interference has benefitted their party. Why do anything to slow that "progress"?

*In before someone says "Russian interference is a hoax", or some excuse about voting districts being justified, or Obama-something-something, or some excrement about how liberals are just as bad and stop listening to left-slanted media.

The first paragraph was the only one for that topic. The second paragraph was meant to piggyback insanity's post regarding the GOP killing a couple more election protection bills. They should've been two separate posts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 13, 2020, 02:34:47 PM
I'm not saying it was the right thing to do, but you're saying because the likelihood was that he wouldn't get impeached his actions should have been ignored?

Wrong is wrong.  If you want to argue it was a poor strategic decision I can understand that.

It was a waste of time just like the blow job mockery of Clinton. You want to really hurt Trump get that crazy poopchute and his cronies out of office.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 13, 2020, 02:59:10 PM
It was a waste of time just like the blow job mockery of Clinton. You want to really hurt Trump get that crazy poopchute and his cronies out of office.

Exactly what I was saying. The Dems wasted time, money, and effort on an impeachment they were flat out told would fail as soon as it hit the GOP-led Senate. It wasn't a "maybe we'll see" it was Mitch McConnell and his associates basically saying "We dare you to send this to us so we can shove it up your asses."

All of the resources spent on the doomed-from-the-start impeachment process should have been used to fight for elections. But as I've said repeatedly, while I am in full support of the D agenda, the GOP are far better politicians.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 13, 2020, 03:07:33 PM
JOHN KELLY IS A SECRET DEMOCRATIC OPERATIVE!  #SPY #SWAMP #FIRED
I DON'T EVEN KNOW THE GUY!!!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 13, 2020, 03:12:39 PM
JOHN KELLY IS A SECRET DEMOCRATIC OPERATIVE!  #SPY #SWAMP #FIRED
I DON'T EVEN KNOW THE GUY!!!!!

Yep, that's what he said.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 13, 2020, 04:21:22 PM
Rand Paul is crying about having a video removed from YouTube.

"A chilling and disturbing day in America when giant web companies such as YouTube decide to censor speech. Protected speech, such as that of a senator on the Sen floor, can be blocked from getting to the people. This is dangerous & politically biased."

This is the same Rand Paul who opposed net neutrality laws, because he felt that “The Internet has successfully flourished without the heavy hand of government interference”, preferring instead to let the companies who operate the internet be able to do as they wish.

Ain't karma a bitch, Rand?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on February 13, 2020, 04:25:15 PM
Exactly what I was saying. The Dems wasted time, money, and effort on an impeachment they were flat out told would fail as soon as it hit the GOP-led Senate. It wasn't a "maybe we'll see" it was Mitch McConnell and his associates basically saying "We dare you to send this to us so we can shove it up your asses."

All of the resources spent on the doomed-from-the-start impeachment process should have been used to fight for elections. But as I've said repeatedly, while I am in full support of the D agenda, the GOP are far better politicians.

They're retarded for sure, it's kind of funny to be honest. We have one of the most unpopular people as President ever and they continually nominate/promote people even more unpopular than that. Crazy......
I will straight up say that Bloomberg is the only option that's palatable to me, he's a Jew so he'll never win.
America was ready for a black person and probably a decent woman but Jew.... Lmao no.


 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 13, 2020, 06:14:31 PM
They're retarded for sure, it's kind of funny to be honest. We have one of the most unpopular people as President ever and they continually nominate/promote people even more unpopular than that. Crazy......
I will straight up say that Bloomberg is the only option that's palatable to me, he's a Jew so he'll never win.
America was ready for a black person and probably a decent woman but Jew.... Lmao no.
I was asking my wife the other day if she ever thought a gay dude would be president before a woman. What a world.....
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 13, 2020, 10:00:50 PM
I was asking my wife the other day if she ever thought a gay dude would be president before a woman. What a world.....


Would be pretty surprising if it was.

I mean Republicans would never vote for a gay dude because of Jesus. And Democrats wouldn't because the blacks don't like gays either.

Whereas I feel like more dems would vote for a woman because she's not a white man. And Republicans went wild over Palin.

I think this is why buttigeg will basically crash and burn once the DNC gets to places like SC
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 14, 2020, 07:34:56 AM


I mean Republicans would never vote for a gay dude
https://twitter.com/search?q=from%3A%40realdonaldtrump%20graydon&s=09
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 14, 2020, 11:06:17 AM
Bipartisan agreement to pull in the reins on Trump's attempts at war powers expansion. Who would've thought Capitol Hill could actually govern?

And how long till Barr is fired for having the gall to say Trump should stop making his job impossible?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 14, 2020, 11:17:35 AM
*My relatively newcomer JO status 2 cents if I may*

The leadership of the DOJ has commandeered the sentencing in a politically sensitive criminal matter, reversing the position uniformly accepted and promoted by highly skilled career prosecutors.  To the point that they all quit.  The criminal attorneys in the U.S. Attorneys' Office in NY are the best of the best.  The 7 to 9 yrs.?  Whatever, but that's a different discussion for another time.  The point is, this ain't right and Barr's got to check himself and Trump and pull back on the reins. 

 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 14, 2020, 11:22:26 AM
*My relatively newcomer JO status 2 cents if I may*

The leadership of the DOJ has commandeered the sentencing in a politically sensitive criminal matter, reversing the position uniformly accepted and promoted by highly skilled career prosecutors.  To the point that they all quit.  The criminal attorneys in the U.S. Attorneys' Office in NY are the best of the best.  The 7 to 9 yrs.?  Whatever, but that's a different discussion for another time.  The point is, this ain't right and Barr's got to check himself and Trump and pull back on the reins.

I'd actually agree with most of this if the clear and obvious juror bias at play didn't exist. The problem is, it does. Stone at the very least should be entitled to a new trial.

The only thing I'd disagree with (call it a function of my career experience if you'd like because its certainly possible I've been jaded after my experience working at legal aid) is the deference the comment gives towards the prosecutors involved. Seven times out of ten, these people are not justice-seekers.

Since some of us around here are so invested in ensuring Stone gets "justice" I'm wondering why those same voices aren't calling the DOJ "compromised" or wanting Bill Barr's head on a pike for declining to charge Andrew McCabe for blatantly lying to Congress.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 14, 2020, 02:55:25 PM
*My relatively newcomer JO status 2 cents if I may*

The leadership of the DOJ has commandeered the sentencing in a politically sensitive criminal matter, reversing the position uniformly accepted and promoted by highly skilled career prosecutors.  To the point that they all quit.  The criminal attorneys in the U.S. Attorneys' Office in NY are the best of the best.  The 7 to 9 yrs.?  Whatever, but that's a different discussion for another time.  The point is, this ain't right and Barr's got to check himself and Trump and pull back on the reins. 

 

New opinions are heavily encouraged. No one wants to hear what me and dcm have to say over and over
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 14, 2020, 04:48:17 PM
New opinions are heavily encouraged. No one wants to hear what me and dcm have to say over and over
Can 100% confirm
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 14, 2020, 05:35:59 PM
New opinions are heavily encouraged. No one wants to hear what me and dcm have to say over and over

Hey I have far less to inject into this political nonsense than some others.

Politics is just a miserable way of life
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 26, 2020, 12:13:09 PM
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/484715-appeals-court-rules-trump-administration-can-withhold-grants-from

Good.

This issue is the biggest example of Congressional inactivity from Republicans in the two years they had a majority to support the person occupying the executive branch that I can think of. There was no reason to even delegate authority to the DOJ, precedent on withholding federal funds for States in non-compliance with federal law (or attaching reasonable conditions on federal funding at the very least) was set thirty five years ago in South Dakota v. Dole.

Paul Ryan is the absolute worst, and I'm glad 2018 happened to clear out the riff raff. As a psychotic movie clown said; you get what you fuckin deserve.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 28, 2020, 09:51:18 PM
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/484715-appeals-court-rules-trump-administration-can-withhold-grants-from

Good.

This issue is the biggest example of Congressional inactivity from Republicans in the two years they had a majority to support the person occupying the executive branch that I can think of. There was no reason to even delegate authority to the DOJ, precedent on withholding federal funds for States in non-compliance with federal law (or attaching reasonable conditions on federal funding at the very least) was set thirty five years ago in South Dakota v. Dole.

Paul Ryan is the absolute worst, and I'm glad 2018 happened to clear out the riff raff. As a psychotic movie clown said; you get what you fuckin deserve.
We get it you hate Mexicans
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 28, 2020, 10:56:35 PM
We get it you hate Mexicans

Yeah, thats it.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on February 29, 2020, 04:53:38 PM
https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-taliban-set-to-sign-deal-meant-to-end-america-s-longest-war-11582977729 (https://www.wsj.com/articles/u-s-taliban-set-to-sign-deal-meant-to-end-america-s-longest-war-11582977729)

Best thing to ever happen on February 29th?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 29, 2020, 07:08:29 PM
Yeah, thats it.
And you love big government control
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 01, 2020, 09:53:17 AM
And you love big government control

(https://img-comment-fun.9cache.com/media/aLDOGOP/aaxN7kDn_700w_0.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 02, 2020, 08:10:37 PM
A story in 2 parts:


https://twitter.com/ccadelago/status/1233555558524841984?s=21

https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1234630808394182656?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 02, 2020, 08:34:15 PM
A story in 2 parts:


https://twitter.com/ccadelago/status/1233555558524841984?s=21

https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1234630808394182656?s=21

Except that wasn't actually the story.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 02, 2020, 08:52:11 PM
A story in 2 parts:


https://twitter.com/ccadelago/status/1233555558524841984?s=21

https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1234630808394182656?s=21

He touched on it but some sexual misconduct allegations was probably a huge factor. That and he's a senile old freak who has no idea what he's saying most of the time. I can't believe people actually watched him. And I don't mean this because of his politics (ie someone like Keith Olbermann was at least funny and charismatic) but he's just absolutely freaking terrible
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 02, 2020, 08:57:17 PM
Except that wasn't actually the story.

I don’t know the story but that’s how a toxic berniebro portrayed it as such
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 03, 2020, 07:07:12 AM
I don’t know the story but that’s how a toxic berniebro portrayed it as such
The important thing is thousands of people saying "Chris Matthews retire bitch" made it happen
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 03, 2020, 08:39:50 AM
The important thing is thousands of people saying "Chris Matthews retire bitch" made it happen
Muh cancel culture
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 03, 2020, 11:34:08 AM
And you love big government control

You're a federalist now! How interesting!

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 03, 2020, 07:22:08 PM
SMH

https://twitter.com/JoshuaPotash/status/1234661401488052226
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 03, 2020, 07:48:29 PM
SMH

https://twitter.com/JoshuaPotash/status/1234661401488052226

Obviously there's no context. But I don't think that's a completely unreasonable question for a person with no medical background to ask his medical task force
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on March 03, 2020, 08:49:48 PM
Obviously there's no context. But I don't think that's a completely unreasonable question for a person with no medical background to ask his medical task force

the context is he asked pharmaceutical reps if the influenza vaccine would be effective against the coronavirus

it's an unreasonable fvcking question to ask for anybody that's been educated in this country. he went to school at fordham and upenn
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 03, 2020, 08:52:18 PM
the context is he asked pharmaceutical reps if the influenza vaccine would be effective against the coronavirus


That's not what he said
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 03, 2020, 09:55:53 PM


the context is he asked pharmaceutical reps if the influenza vaccine would be effective against the coronavirus

it's an unreasonable fvcking question to ask for anybody that's been educated in this country. he went to school at fordham and upenn

*daddy paid his way through Fordham and UPenn
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 04, 2020, 09:01:14 AM
https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1235187400646840320?s=21

Lefty Alex Jones having a normal one
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 04, 2020, 09:06:33 AM
Also I had no idea he, lmaooooooooo, ran for office. Ran for the CA-25 congressional seat vacated by Katie Hill. The results:

Christy Smith (D) - 30%
Mike Garcia (R) - 27%
Steve Knight (R) - 20%
Cenk Uygur (D) - 4%
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 04, 2020, 11:42:42 AM
https://twitter.com/davereaboi/status/1235187400646840320?s=21

Lefty Alex Jones having a normal one
^ esp. when he's freaking out (eyes/eyebrows):  scheming John Belushi in Animal House?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 05, 2020, 10:41:18 AM
Cool, glad we're threatening Supreme Court justices on the steps of the Court now.

And before someone tries to get in the whataboutism of Trump criticizing Sotomayor and RBG, the latter actually commented on an ongoing election as a Supreme Court justice (an unprecedented no no), and the former has made her disdain for this administration known in multiple dissents.

 Besides, there's a difference between a critique and an out and out threat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 05, 2020, 11:25:27 AM
Trump admits to sexual assault on camera <yawn> "Totally taken outta context"

Schumer warns justices that the public and history will remember their decisions <torches lit> "Listen to this lover of the older lady throwin' threats at the Court!!!111ONEone"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 05, 2020, 04:07:16 PM
Trump admits to sexual assault on camera <yawn> "Totally taken outta context"

Schumer warns justices that the public and history will remember their decisions <torches lit> "Listen to this lover of the older lady throwin' threats at the Court!!!111ONEone"

still parroting this absolute falsehood are we? I've already explained how absurd this notion is, multiple times.

Schumer himself admitted he used inappropriate language, i don't know why you're shilling for him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 05, 2020, 07:11:39 PM
still parroting this absolute falsehood are we? I've already explained how absurd this notion is, multiple times.

Schumer himself admitted he used inappropriate language, i don't know why you're shilling for him.

Apologizing doesnt mean admitting to guilt of a crime, although trump would have you think that it does
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 05, 2020, 07:26:07 PM
Apologizing doesnt mean admitting to guilt of a crime, although trump would have you think that it does

So what he said wasn't inappropriate?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 05, 2020, 08:24:18 PM
Full blown dcm mode

https://twitter.com/JoshuaPotash/status/1235696925778653185?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 05, 2020, 09:45:30 PM
LOL.

http://huffp.st/5aAiB78
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 06, 2020, 08:46:18 AM
https://twitter.com/JoshuaPotash/status/1235696925778653185?s=19
^ Santelli's a real lightbulb..

and stupidity's contagious  (essentially harmless but as a public official it's still juvenile dumb):

 https://www.snopes.com/fact-check/candi-cdebaca-tweet-coronavirus/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 06, 2020, 11:10:22 AM
https://twitter.com/repkenbuck/status/1235944686910660609?s=21

Lol this guy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 06, 2020, 12:16:00 PM
still parroting this absolute falsehood are we? I've already explained how absurd this notion is, multiple times.

Schumer himself admitted he used inappropriate language, i don't know why you're shilling for him.

You certainly parroted a ridiculous argument a number of times, yes. You could throw feces at the wall all day and tell me you're redecorating too.

The only thing that's absurd is your argument. And yes, Chuck did say he used inappropriate language, but only an idiot would actually believe he meant those words as an actual physical threat. But hey, whenever the Right gets a chance to point a finger and say "See!? You're the same!!!!111ONEone" I guess you gotta jump on it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 06, 2020, 12:19:52 PM
You certainly parroted a ridiculous argument a number of times, yes. You could throw feces at the wall all day and tell me you're redecorating too.

The only thing that's absurd is your argument. And yes, Chuck did say he used inappropriate language, but only an idiot would actually believe he meant those words as an actual physical threat. But hey, whenever the Right gets a chance to point a finger and say "See!? You're the same!!!!111ONEone" I guess you gotta jump on it.

 
So a clear joke in which someone also expressly notes consent is "an admission of sexual assault" but telling judges "you'll pay the price" before idiotically trying to spin it as really a political threat against Senate Republicans isn't a clear threat. What did he mean if not physically? How would judges pay a political price, their lifetime appointees.

I'm not pointing the finger and saying we're the same at all, the mainstream left is a lot more flippant with violent rhetoric. Isn't that right Mad Maxine? FFS people are still joking about Rand Paul's psycho neighbor breaking his ribs and idiotically trying to rationalize Steve Scalise almost getting freaking murdered because he's against universal healthcare.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on March 06, 2020, 02:05:34 PM
https://twitter.com/repkenbuck/status/1235944686910660609?s=21

Lol this guy

i am not watching the video. is he saying that if they come try and take that gun, he will shoot them?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on March 06, 2020, 02:20:11 PM
i am not watching the video. is he saying that if they come try and take that gun, he will shoot them?

I'm pretty sure he's saying he is an impotent, closeted gay man.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 06, 2020, 02:38:07 PM
I'm pretty sure he's saying he is an impotent, closeted gay man.

Believe in the 2nd Amendment? You must have a micropenis hawhawhaw.

I have never understood this line of thinking. I thought overcompensation came in the way of buying an overexpensive car.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on March 06, 2020, 03:09:19 PM
Believe in the 2nd Amendment? You must have a micropenis hawhawhaw.


This is the epitome of a strawman...but I think you're a smart person and you already kind of knew that when you posted it half-seriously.

No, I don't think every person who is a staunch advocate of the 2nd amendment (i have zero issue with that) also has a micropenis (?? projecting??).

But when some pandering fuckwit with a (lolol) red white and blue gun wants to play big shot tough guy on Twitter against the pretend people who are going to steal all the guns....I might poke a wee bit of fun.


I thought overcompensation came in the way of buying an overexpensive car.

Very true. Unless it's a Bentley Continental that I can magically afford; then it proves that I have an enormous, dangerously potent hog.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 06, 2020, 03:59:32 PM
I have a Prius.  My penis is infinity!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on March 07, 2020, 08:45:38 AM
I'm not pointing the finger and saying we're the same at all, the mainstream left is a lot more flippant with violent rhetoric.
(https://dynaimage.cdn.cnn.com/cnn/c_fill,g_auto,w_1200,h_675,ar_16:9/https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.cnn.com%2Fcnnnext%2Fdam%2Fassets%2F170814193931-01-ryan-kelly-charlottesville.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 07, 2020, 04:38:26 PM
(https://dynaimage.cdn.cnn.com/cnn/c_fill,g_auto,w_1200,h_675,ar_16:9/https%3A%2F%2Fcdn.cnn.com%2Fcnnnext%2Fdam%2Fassets%2F170814193931-01-ryan-kelly-charlottesville.jpg)


To be fair he said mainstream not extreme
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 11, 2020, 06:00:45 AM
https://twitter.com/johnruddick2/status/1236944247263133696?s=21

Classic Hillary
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 11, 2020, 06:18:53 AM
https://twitter.com/johnruddick2/status/1236944247263133696?s=21

Classic Hillary

MERS, which was another and much more lethal coronavirus, was 2012.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 11, 2020, 06:28:49 AM
She should've brought this all up during her campaign

Oh well
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 11, 2020, 06:59:32 AM
MERS, which was another and much more lethal coronavirus, was 2012.

Google says there were 2 recorded cases in US history. Thank God Hillary was there to avert this crisis.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 13, 2020, 01:17:46 PM
Quote
MIAMI — Andrew Gillum, one of the Democratic Party’s fast-rising political stars, was in a Miami Beach hotel room early on Friday when emergency workers were called to treat another man suffering from a probable drug overdose, the police said.

By the time the police arrived at the Mondrian South Beach shortly after midnight, paramedics had treated the man, and he was in stable condition. Officers tried to speak to Mr. Gillum but were unable to “due to his inebriated state,” according to an incident report filed by the Miami Beach Police Department. Mr. Gillum was intoxicated and vomiting in the bathroom, according to the report.

The police said they had impounded three small plastic bags “containing suspected crystal meth” that officers saw on both the bed and floor of the hotel room.

“At this time, the incident is not being investigated as a criminal matter,” Officer Ernesto Rodriguez, a department spokesman, said in an email.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/13/us/andrew-gillum-miami.html#click=https://t.co/N7CYBmdSFm

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 13, 2020, 10:00:32 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/03/13/us/andrew-gillum-miami.html#click=https://t.co/N7CYBmdSFm




https://twitter.com/billycorben/status/1238518960829517824?s=21


Uhhhhh
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 14, 2020, 06:35:41 AM
Quote
Travis Dyson is the 30-year-old Florida man who was found in a hotel room with Democratic politician Andrew Gillum on March 13. Police said Dyson appeared to have suffered a drug overdose. He is conscious and in stable condition in a Miami-area hospital.

Dyson maintains a profile on a website for male escorts and is studying at a nurse practitioner school. Gillum has been married to R. Jai Gillum since 2009. The couple have three children together.

yup

Quote
The man who rented the room, Aldo Mejias, 53, said he went to the room before midnight on March 12. Mejias said that he found Dyson and Gillum “under the influence of an unknown substance.” Mejias said that Gillum had been vomiting into the toilet and that Dyson was unconscious. Mejias performed CPR on Dyson until the paramedics arrived. The incident occurred at the Mondrian South Beach Hotel in Miami Beach, Florida.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 14, 2020, 08:29:40 AM
Quote
MINNEAPOLIS -- U.S. Rep. Ilhan Omar of Minnesota has married a political consultant who worked for her, months after the two were accused of having an affair, which she denied.

A marriage license filed in Washington, D.C., shows Omar married political consultant Tim Mynett on Wednesday. Omar announced her new marriage Wednesday night on Instagram, with a photo of her and a bearded man smiling and displaying wedding rings. “Got married! From partners in politics to life partners, so blessed,” the post says, without identifying Mynett by name.

Filings with the Federal Election Commission show Omar's campaign paid Tim Mynett or his firm nearly $600,000 since July 2018. Though it may raise eyebrows, family members, including spouses, can be on the campaign payroll as long as the family member provides services at a fair market value.

Larry Jacobs, a politics professor at the University of Minnesota's Humphrey School of Public Affairs, said the work needs to be reasonable and there has to be actual work being done.

Jacobs said constituents may question the way Omar handled the situation.

“Remember the story began with her denying a relationship, and now she’s marrying that person,” Jacobs said. “I think there are legitimate questions that constituents might ask about whether Congresswoman Omar has been fully truthful in her discussion of this relationship, and the nature of her marriage to a previous husband," whom Omar divorced last fall.


A relationship between Omar and Mynett was publicly alleged in August, when Mynett's then-wife, Beth Mynett, filed for divorce and accused her husband and Omar of having an affair. In response, Tim Mynett filed his own court document denying that he told his wife he was in love with Omar and was ending his marriage to be with the congresswoman.

When Omar was asked at the time whether she was separated from her then-husband or dating someone, she told WCCO-TV, "No, I am not." She has since declined to discuss her personal life.

In October, she filed for divorce from Ahmed Hirsi, citing an “irretrievable breakdown” in the marriage. That divorce was finalized in November.

According to Beth Mynett's divorce filing, Tim Mynett is a founder of E Street Group and met Omar while working for her. His LinkedIn page says he is still a partner at the firm; and a spokesman for Omar confirmed that E Street has a current contract with her campaign.

Data on OpenSecrets.org shows the Omar campaign has been E Street Group's biggest moneymaker, bringing in more than $523,000 in the 2020 election cycle alone.

Sheila Krumholz, executive director of the Center for Responsive Politics, said it's notable that Omar's campaign is the firm's top client, and that they are now family.

“I think it begs some questions, which might be easily explained,” she said. “Since there isn't a prohibition on paying family members, it usually comes down to understanding the patterns and PACs and whether that's a concern to the constituents and donors.”

According to FEC filings, Omar’s campaign paid Mynett or his firm for services including fundraising consulting, internet advertising, website development and digital communications. Several payments were also for travel expenses.

A spokesman with the Office of Congressional Ethics said he's not permitted to either confirm or deny whether it is investigating.

Omar has been dogged by questions about her personal life since she first ran for state representative in 2016, with conservatives alleging she was married to Hirsi and another man at once, and that the other man was her brother. She has called those claims “disgusting lies."

-ABC News

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 19, 2020, 06:31:01 PM
https://twitter.com/robertfaturechi/status/1240746141236359168?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 19, 2020, 07:40:57 PM
https://twitter.com/robertfaturechi/status/1240746141236359168?s=21
Not a good look.  I'll wait to see how much is true about the meeting being secret or about the stock selling.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 19, 2020, 07:42:10 PM
Not a good look.  I'll wait to see how much is true about the meeting being secret or about the stock selling.
https://twitter.com/lhfang/status/1240755632677871616?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 19, 2020, 07:50:09 PM
https://theintercept.com/2015/05/07/congress-argues-cant-investigated-insider-trading/

Guess it isn't illegal anymore.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 19, 2020, 08:01:22 PM
https://twitter.com/lachlan/status/1240802700171849731?s=19

https://twitter.com/lachlan/status/1240803133309292551?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 19, 2020, 08:02:02 PM
I suppose the only way to get around the congress insider trader thing. Would be either to make it illegal for them to own stock (seems unrealistic/inappropriate) or to make their portfolios/transactions public at all times (I think this is a reasonable middle ground)

It still leaves funky business possible, but at least is mroe transparent
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 19, 2020, 08:06:07 PM
https://twitter.com/lachlan/status/1240802700171849731?s=19

https://twitter.com/lachlan/status/1240803133309292551?s=19

The dude Bo posted about seemed really shady, as what he sold consisted of a large percentage of his net worth.

This chick sold between 1-3 million worth of stock, when she's worth over 500 million?

Seems like more of a stretch
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 19, 2020, 08:33:05 PM
The dude Bo posted about seemed really shady, as what he sold consisted of a large percentage of his net worth.

This chick sold between 1-3 million worth of stock, when she's worth over 500 million?

Seems like more of a stretch
You're right, it's not unethical if you're already rich.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 19, 2020, 08:49:34 PM
You're right, it's not unethical if you're already rich.

I think the suggestion was, she was probably operating in her normal course of business. Whether that's true or not, I have no idea.

Burr can get the freaking guillotine.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 19, 2020, 09:17:24 PM
The dude Bo posted about seemed really shady, as what he sold consisted of a large percentage of his net worth.

This chick sold between 1-3 million worth of stock, when she's worth over 500 million?

Seems like more of a stretch
Her husband is chairman of the NYSE.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 19, 2020, 09:22:45 PM
You're right, it's not unethical if you're already rich.
I honestly don't know the bitch, but I am more willing to listen to her excuse being she only sold 1 or 2 percent of her net worth versus some other player of the pink oboe that sold 80 plus percent of his. There is a little context there. Both look bad but one is definitely way more egregious than the other.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on March 19, 2020, 09:28:10 PM
I honestly don't know the bitch, but I am more willing to listen to her excuse being she only sold 1 or 2 percent of her net worth versus some other player of the pink oboe that sold 80 plus percent of his. There is a little context there. Both look bad but one is definitely way more egregious than the other.
I’d like to think economically minded people had the foresight to sell stock in an impending stock market crash
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 19, 2020, 09:32:02 PM
Her husband is chairman of the NYSE.

Exactly

Dude worth 500 million whose job is to run the freaking stock exchange sells stock equaling an insignificant amount of his net worth.

Oh the horror
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 19, 2020, 10:16:30 PM
I’d like to think economically minded people had the foresight to sell stock in an impending stock market crash
Sure but the notion that people up and sell entire portfolios to move to cash is pure and utter bullshit. I was in the institutional end for a long time. Only a few, very few funds, are even allowed to move to cash like that. So a small percentage sale is normal but an entire portfolio, nfw.

Most of this selling is the unwinding of leveraged positions and trades going south. Most trades and huge positions are linked and when one part of the trade goes bad they have to unwind everything. That's why the selloffs are massive or the resulting bounce is just as massive.

My guess is it will get worse before better. It will turn around when companies report light at the end of the tunnel. The turnaround will be more massive than the drop off and I plan on trading advantage of it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 19, 2020, 10:34:57 PM
Quote
A wealthy Georgia senator is reportedly the second member of Congress to have dumped massive shares of stocks following a private, chamber-wide meeting on the new coronavirus.

Sen. Kelly Loeffler (R-GA), whose husband is the chairman and CEO of the New York Stock Exchange, began selling off more than a million dollars in stocks on the same day as the closed-door Senate meeting on Friday, Jan. 24, reports The Daily Beast.

Over the next three weeks, through Feb. 14, Loeffler made 27 sales worth between $1,275,000 and $3,100,000, before the market nosedived and her holdings’ values tanked.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Pope on March 19, 2020, 10:36:23 PM
Sure but the notion that people up and sell entire portfolios to move to cash is pure and utter bullshit. I was in the institutional end for a long time. Only a few, very few funds, are even allowed to move to cash like that. So a small percentage sale is normal but an entire portfolio, nfw.

Most of this selling is the unwinding of leveraged positions and trades going south. Most trades and huge positions are linked and when one part of the trade goes bad they have to unwind everything. That's why the selloffs are massive or the resulting bounce is just as massive.

My guess is it will get worse before better. It will turn around when companies report light at the end of the tunnel. The turnaround will be more massive than the drop off and I plan on trading advantage of it.
Agreed. I’m ready to go all in early april
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 19, 2020, 10:45:27 PM


That's what Badger had jsut posted.

They're worth over 500 million dollars, and her husband's head of the NYSE.

Selling less than 1% of their net worth worth of stock over the course of one month isn't particularly suspicious
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 19, 2020, 10:46:28 PM
Agreed. I’m ready to go all in early april

It's definitely nerve-wracking figuring out where the bottom is.

I'm far more concerned about missing the golden window, than losing anything
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 19, 2020, 10:56:55 PM
It's definitely nerve-wracking figuring out where the bottom is.

I'm far more concerned about missing the golden window, than losing anything
The biggest misconception is picking tops and bottoms. The best investors ever never do and can't. They know when stuff is cheap and when it's expensive and act accordingly. This notion that you can pick the top or bottom is freaking dumb.

 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2020, 12:33:54 AM
This would be absolutely catastrophic if true. And set the tone for some seriously dark excrement ahead

Quote
Coronavirus: California estimates 25.5 million residents — 56% of the state — will get virus in next 8 weeks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2020, 12:36:13 AM
The biggest misconception is picking tops and bottoms. The best investors ever never do and can't. They know when stuff is cheap and when it's expensive and act accordingly. This notion that you can pick the top or bottom is freaking dumb.

 

Well I'm certainly not expecting to time the market

Rather utilizing a sensible approach with DCA buying as it drops. What I was talking about it having the market rapidly recover over a day or two. And basically start cranking towards DOW 100k
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 20, 2020, 12:59:44 AM
Well I'm certainly not expecting to time the market

Rather utilizing a sensible approach with DCA buying as it drops. What I was talking about it having the market rapidly recover over a day or two. And basically start cranking towards DOW 100k

You miss a day you miss a day but what I quoted is pretty sensible and exactly what you should be doing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2020, 01:54:27 AM
You miss a day you miss a day but what I quoted is pretty sensible and exactly what you should be doing.

True but this is extreme volatility.

I mean I put a chunk of change in at dow 25,000 and in under a month it was at 18,000  compounded over 30 years that could make several hundred thousand dollars of a difference in returns
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 20, 2020, 06:31:10 AM
..(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200320/32d29be1d1ba05a7a0658995544e7f18.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 20, 2020, 06:35:55 AM
Fire her into the sun
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 20, 2020, 06:59:37 AM
Fire her into the sun
If her statement is true, I don't think she did anything wrong.  There's probably plenty of other reasons to fire her into the sun though (after the hate f***, of course)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2020, 07:22:31 AM
Odd that Diane Feinstein isn't mentioned in here, yet her and husband sold the most stock of all right before this 🤔
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 20, 2020, 07:23:49 AM
Odd that Diane Feinstein isn't mentioned in here, yet her and husband sold the most stock of all right before this
Her $ was in a blind trust. She had zero control over what was bought and sold
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2020, 07:56:13 AM
Her $ was in a blind trust. She had zero control over what was bought and sold


Her situation probably isn't different from Loefllers. Except it's a much larger % of Feinsteins net worth
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 20, 2020, 07:58:22 AM
Odd that Diane Feinstein isn't mentioned in here, yet her and husband sold the most stock of all right before this
I actually just opened this thread to post this.

https://twitter.com/jamiedupree/status/1240817956356935681?s=20
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2020, 08:02:10 AM
I suppose it's possible that the reason all these politicians were selling stock in January is they thought Bernie Sanders was going to win
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 20, 2020, 08:03:33 AM
dcm Headshot
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 20, 2020, 08:04:52 AM
Her situation probably isn't different from Loefllers. Except it's a much larger % of Feinsteins net worth
I'm guessing Feinstein had even less control than Loeffler. Loeffler probably didn't have a blind trust, but had it in a fund that sold the stocks without her input.  Like any mutual fund, you don't control what they buy and sell, you just control whether you own the fund. In a blind trust, you don't even know or control what funds it is in.

Burr, on the other hand has some splainin' to do.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2020, 08:06:43 AM
I'm guessing Feinstein had even less control than Loeffler. Loeffler probably didn't have a blind trust, but had it in a fund that sold the stocks without her input.  Like any mutual fund, you don't control what they buy and sell, you just control whether you own the fund. In a blind trust, you don't even know or control what funds it is in.

Burr, on the other hand has some splainin' to do.


I mean they're both women. Of course they didn't control or know what funds they're in
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 20, 2020, 08:07:41 AM
I mean they're both women. Of course they didn't control or know what funds they're in
This guy. Haha.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 20, 2020, 08:10:47 AM
https://amp.ft.com/content/b7a21a16-6a1f-11ea-800d-da70cff6e4d3?__twitter_impression=true

Quote
Rising Pharmaceuticals, a New Jersey based company, increased the price of chloroquine — an antimalarial, which is one of the drugs that is being tested against Covid-19 — on January 23, according to data from research firm Elsevier. The drug price rose 97.86 per cent to $7.66 per 250mg pill and $19.88 per 500mg pill. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 20, 2020, 08:19:24 AM
I actually just opened this thread to post this.

https://twitter.com/jamiedupree/status/1240817956356935681?s=20

Look at the dates of the sales and the position on the tracker (https://www.google.com/search?q=allogene+therapeutics+stock&rlz=1C1CHBF_enCA872CA872&oq=allogene+therapeutics+stock+&aqs=chrome..69i57j0l5.12737j1j7&sourceid=chrome&ie=UTF-8) (you'll need to switch to the 6 month view). She didn't exactly sell top of the market, it was at a 3 month low at the time of the first sale and at the time of the second was tracking back up, she sold the second tranche at around $24 and it carried on climbing to over $28 over the next two weeks before then dropping heavily. Doesn't look too suspicious from where I am.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 20, 2020, 08:25:12 AM
https://amp.ft.com/content/b7a21a16-6a1f-11ea-800d-da70cff6e4d3?__twitter_impression=true


Not to be argumentative. But do you think it's possible that there's a legitimate reason that the price of a drug being produced in city where everything is shut down and quarantined increased by a reasonable amount?

To me this doesn't scream corrupt company price gouging insulin. But rather a company under siege in one of the most infected areas of the country, who probably has seen numerous other costs increase as well.

The company in Italy selling those ventilator valves for 4000$ when someone could 3d print them for next to nothing. That's unreasonable.

This on the other hand doesn't seem unreasonable at all, whatsoever
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 20, 2020, 09:22:27 AM
https://twitter.com/drdenagrayson/status/1240816201976201217?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 20, 2020, 10:56:48 PM
https://twitter.com/lizardrumsfeld/status/1241124944299393027?s=21

This is the tweet
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 23, 2020, 04:26:44 PM
You can always count on a Good ol legislative branch clusterfuck during a national crisis
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on March 25, 2020, 11:48:53 AM
grandpa hair sniffer vs a reality TV show star

Idiocracy achieved
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 25, 2020, 12:49:50 PM
From what I can gather the Dem’s Coronavirus relief bill includes “$25 million for additional salary for the House of Representatives”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 25, 2020, 12:57:22 PM
You can always count on a Good ol legislative branch clusterfuck during a national crisis

Quote
House will not pass coronavirus bill today. Already gaveled in, gaveled out of pro fotm session. Senior sources say House won’t meet again later today

Wednesday:

10:00:42 AM—Convened in the House

10:02:37 AM—Adjourned
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 25, 2020, 12:58:11 PM
Quote
Expect senators to get of town quickly after today’s vote. The Senate is likely to adjourn until at least April 20, per senators.

This basically means they’re adding next week as a recess in addition to two-week recess on the books

It‘s unclear if the recess will be extended.

Damn get these guys a raise too
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 25, 2020, 01:00:00 PM
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES – $25 MILLION
SALARIES AND EXPENSES – $25 million. Funding supports the House’s capability to telework,
including for purchase of equipment and improvements to the network. Funding is also provided for the
reimbursement costs for the staff of the House Child Care Center and covers costs for the House restaurant
contracts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on March 25, 2020, 01:22:35 PM
how much of that 25 mil do you think would go to the staff of the child care/restaurant services? probably a paltry amount

'funding for the house's capability to telework'. these mutherfuckers already had computers, internet connections, and phones prior to this. this is fcking bullshit
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 25, 2020, 01:33:48 PM
how much of that 25 mil do you think would go to the staff of the child care/restaurant services? probably a paltry amount

'funding for the house's capability to telework'. these mutherfuckers already had computers, internet connections, and phones prior to this. this is fcking bullshit
In their defense, if purchasing contracts are as stupid as I think, they are probably forced to pay $25,000 for a shitty Walmart cat 5 cable because they only have 1 approved source.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 25, 2020, 10:07:09 PM
https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=6817441-House-Democrats-Counterproposal-For-Stimulus

The Coronavirus relief bill includes:

$25 million for additional salary for the House of Representatives
$300 million for International Disaster Assistance
$100 million to NASA
$300 million to Endowment for the Arts
$300 million to Endowment for the Humanities
$500 million to museums and libraries
$75 million to NPR and CBS
$35 million to JFK Center for performing arts
$300 million for migrant and refugee assistance
$90 million for the Peace Corp
$200 million for fuel research
$20 billion to USPS

-requiring early voting
-same day voter registration
-online voter registration
-no Id required to vote
-requiring airlines to fully offset carbon emissions
-airlines required to disclose greenhouse gas emissions


I got tired and stopped reading.

Obviously this is all integral to getting people that are out of work money for food and rent and the hospitals the supplies they need.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on March 25, 2020, 10:10:56 PM
Unfucking real
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 25, 2020, 10:25:19 PM
Is that real?

It seems like one of those nonsensical trolling jbos and I genuinely can't tell



I also find it hysterical that a huge deal was made of ensuring no money goes to any of Trumps businesses because it's a conflict of interest. But giving themselves an extra 25 million bonus, totally cool
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 26, 2020, 01:46:05 AM


https://apps.npr.org/documents/document.html?id=6817441-House-Democrats-Counterproposal-For-Stimulus

The Coronavirus relief bill includes:

$25 million for additional salary for the House of Representatives
$300 million for International Disaster Assistance
$100 million to NASA
$300 million to Endowment for the Arts
$300 million to Endowment for the Humanities
$500 million to museums and libraries
$75 million to NPR and CBS
$35 million to JFK Center for performing arts
$300 million for migrant and refugee assistance
$90 million for the Peace Corp
$200 million for fuel research
$20 billion to USPS

-requiring early voting
-same day voter registration
-online voter registration
-no Id required to vote
-requiring airlines to fully offset carbon emissions
-airlines required to disclose greenhouse gas emissions


I got tired and stopped reading.

Obviously this is all integral to getting people that are out of work money for food and rent and the hospitals the supplies they need.

This is the House Counterproposal from Pelosi, not the actual bill the Senate passed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 26, 2020, 04:58:57 AM

This is the House Counterproposal from Pelosi, not the actual bill the Senate passed.

But why
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 26, 2020, 06:39:18 AM
But why
Eleventeen
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 29, 2020, 05:05:32 PM
From what I can gather the Dem’s Coronavirus relief bill includes “$25 million for additional salary for the House of Representatives”
Wherever you gathered this from, stop going there
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 29, 2020, 05:51:42 PM
Wherever you gathered this from, stop going there

It was pretty hard to keep track of what went into the bill and why it took so long to write/pass, especially when it contains so many extraneous things to actual Coronavirus supplies/relief.  Competent countries governments got this stuff done weeks ago, because they were focused on actually helping their citizens instead of playing partisan politics.

This makes me think the bill may actually have some redeeming qualities:
https://twitter.com/jordanuhl/status/1243559111813447682?s=21

Can’t believe the dems unanimously passed this smh
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 29, 2020, 06:18:46 PM
"Reporter" from OANN asks softball question to Trump, gets called on again later in the presser and mistakenly asks the same exact question because she is a plant and a dumbass.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 29, 2020, 06:33:09 PM
"Reporter" from OANN asks softball question to Trump, gets called on again later in the presser and mistakenly asks the same exact question because she is a plant and a dumbass.

“Mr. President, do you consider the term 'Chinese food' to be racist because it is food that originated from China?"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 29, 2020, 07:49:17 PM
If AOC says it's bad then it must be good(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200330/6bb82bce155789c97bcfc7fd4b2217bf.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 29, 2020, 08:42:57 PM
If AOC says it's bad then it must be good(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200330/6bb82bce155789c97bcfc7fd4b2217bf.jpg)

*Nancy Pelosi said it’s good and your opinion is irrelevant gif*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 29, 2020, 10:38:05 PM
*Nancy Pelosi said it’s good and your opinion is irrelevant gif*
Oh excrement then it's bad

freak
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 30, 2020, 03:19:09 PM
https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1244232787030413312?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 30, 2020, 03:28:29 PM
https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1244232787030413312?s=21
Why?  Isn't that kinda what its for?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 01, 2020, 10:13:00 AM
https://www.politico.com/news/2020/03/30/new-aoc-divides-the-left-150767

AOC is a fraud
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 13, 2020, 03:45:34 PM
https://twitter.com/brespolitico/status/1249788866200035338?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 13, 2020, 04:25:18 PM
https://twitter.com/brespolitico/status/1249788866200035338?s=21
Steiny?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 20, 2020, 06:26:30 AM
https://twitter.com/thecrimson/status/1250491617137569792?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 20, 2020, 08:25:06 AM
https://twitter.com/thecrimson/status/1250491617137569792?s=21

Not sure the significance of this?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 20, 2020, 08:42:58 AM
Not sure the significance of this?

They’re one of the richest schools in the universe with a $40 billion dollar endowment, why are we giving them bailout money
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 20, 2020, 08:46:28 AM
They’re one of the richest schools in the universe with a $40 billion dollar endowment, why are we giving them bailout money

Did you read the article?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 20, 2020, 08:46:58 AM
They’re one of the richest schools in the universe with a $40 billion dollar endowment, why are we giving them bailout money

Unlike giving bailout money to multibillion dollar corporations and the like?

We spend money on all kinds of retarded excrement

This is a drop in the bucket
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 20, 2020, 10:59:18 AM
Did you read the article?

Yes, still not sure why Harvard needs economic relief when, as dcm put it, this is a drop on the bucket for them
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 20, 2020, 11:00:50 AM
Unlike giving bailout money to multibillion dollar corporations and the like?

We spend money on all kinds of retarded excrement

This is a drop in the bucket

It is exactly like that, and I had a problem with that as well

 source: my posts on the previous thread page
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 20, 2020, 11:02:23 AM
Yes, still not sure why Harvard needs economic relief when, as dcm put it, this is a drop on the bucket for them

It's not very well written, at least if clarity was their intent, but I read this to mean that the funds were for distribution to students impacted by the shutdown, not the schools themselves:

Quote
Of the $8,655,748 Harvard is slated to receive, the government has mandated that at least half — $4,327,874 — be reserved for emergency financial aid grants to students.

The Department of Education will distribute the first $6.28 billion to colleges and universities to cover expenses such as course materials, technology, food, and housing students have incurred “related to disruptions in their education due to the COVID-19 outbreak,” according to a April 9 press release.

The Department of Education is requiring universities to sign a certification agreeing to the conditions of use before they can access the funding, but each school may allocate the financial aid funds at their own discretion.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 20, 2020, 11:05:21 AM
It's not very well written, at least if clarity was their intent, but I read this to mean that the funds were for distribution to students impacted by the shutdown, not the schools themselves:


I’m saying Harvard should be the one to help those students.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 20, 2020, 11:17:35 AM
I’m saying Harvard should be the one to help those students.

OK, but what's your cutoff point then? Which schools get help and which don't, and what are the criteria you're using?

Surely the point here is that the government is helping the students, and the schools are simply the distribution network for the funds as they are best placed to determine which students need help. If the trust fund babies are getting handouts then I agree that it's a problem, but it's my understanding that there are plenty of smart kids from poorer backgrounds studying at the Ivy Leagues on scholarship.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 20, 2020, 01:27:29 PM

https://college.harvard.edu/guides/financial-aid-fact-sheet
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 20, 2020, 02:28:44 PM
https://twitter.com/oilfield_rando/status/1251478913064357889?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 21, 2020, 07:16:31 AM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2020/04/kim-jong-un-reportedly-in-grave-danger-following-surgery.html

Could have major implications for global politics if he dies
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on April 21, 2020, 05:05:38 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2020/04/kim-jong-un-reportedly-in-grave-danger-following-surgery.html

Could have major implications for global politics if he dies
Trump: I ended the fight with north korea
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on April 21, 2020, 05:44:47 PM
North Korean press: "Too Much Love in Glorious Leader's Mighty Heart"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: guinness77 on April 21, 2020, 06:48:39 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/nymag.com/intelligencer/amp/2020/04/kim-jong-un-reportedly-in-grave-danger-following-surgery.html

Could have major implications for global politics if he dies
That’s what most people said when his daddy died.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on April 21, 2020, 07:42:15 PM
That’s what most people said when his daddy died.

His sister would take over, what's the chances of her being a loon?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: guinness77 on April 21, 2020, 07:54:54 PM
His sister would take over, what's the chances of her being a loon?
I’m guessing pretty good.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 21, 2020, 07:58:07 PM
That’s what most people said when his daddy died.

Didnt say they'd turn into rainbows and unicorns.

If anything id expect a massive pissing match over who gets influence in there between the axis of evil (China) vs everyone else
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on April 24, 2020, 02:06:27 PM
https://twitter.com/ryangrim/status/1253755834204594178

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 13, 2020, 12:13:39 PM
dcm is a GOP aide?

https://twitter.com/woodruffbets/status/1260581800696582144?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 01, 2020, 10:03:53 AM
https://twitter.com/jstein_wapo/status/1267253355530858496?s=21

I am SHOCKED
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 01, 2020, 12:30:03 PM
If you weigh the odds that this Congress would do something to alleviate the material conditions that lead to this kind of desperation, vs them passing some sort of broad sweeping increase of police powers, doing nothing is not the worst outcome here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 01, 2020, 12:36:33 PM
If you weigh the odds that this Congress would do something to alleviate the material conditions that lead to this kind of desperation, vs them passing some sort of broad sweeping increase of police powers, doing nothing is not the worst outcome here.

Why would a Democrat controlled congress do the latter?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 01, 2020, 02:10:28 PM
If you weigh the odds that this Congress would do something to alleviate the material conditions that lead to this kind of desperation, vs them passing some sort of broad sweeping increase of police powers, doing nothing is not the worst outcome here.

From Joe Biden’s website, section “The Biden Plan for Black America”

Quote
Reinvigorate community-oriented policing.

Policing works best when officers are out of their cruisers and walking the streets, engaging with and getting to know members of their communities. But in order to do that, police departments need resources to hire a sufficient number of officers. Biden spearheaded the Community Oriented Policing Services (COPS) program, which authorized funding both for the hiring of additional police officers and for training on how to undertake a community policing approach. However, the program has never been funded to fulfill the original vision for community policing. Biden will reinvigorate the COPS program with a $300 million investment. As a condition of the grant, hiring of police officers must mirror the racial diversity of the community they serve. Additionally, as President, Biden will establish a panel to scrutinize what equipment is used by law enforcement in our communities.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 01, 2020, 02:36:09 PM
Why would a Democrat controlled congress do the latter?
lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 01, 2020, 02:40:02 PM
Why would a Democrat controlled congress do the latter?

Democrats wrote and passed the Crime Bill in the first place. Although if Joe gets elected he probably would do everything in his power to try and mitigate the fact that he wrote the original bill from his legacy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 01, 2020, 03:05:14 PM
I was told Democrats are good
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 01, 2020, 03:07:01 PM
I was told Democrats are good

Anyone can freak this up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 01, 2020, 06:15:05 PM
I was told Democrats are good
Depends which ones
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on June 01, 2020, 06:16:29 PM
I was told Democrats are good
Being better than the other side doesn't make them good.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 02, 2020, 12:32:37 PM
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1267833527002894339?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 02, 2020, 12:49:38 PM
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1267833527002894339?s=21

Meh.  Trump or Pelosi, I really don't care.  It's primary purpose is as a prop for hypocrites, other than that it's just the world's worst fan fiction. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 02, 2020, 01:06:01 PM
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1267833527002894339?s=21

It’s been done. Although she looks less confused about what she’s holding than that other guy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2020, 01:14:06 PM
The most Presidential thing that 45 has ever said:

Quote
“We are a nation in pain, but we must not allow this pain to destroy us. We are a nation enraged, but we cannot allow our rage to consume us. We are a nation exhausted, but we will not allow our exhaustion to defeat us. The only way to bear this pain is to turn all that anguish to purpose. And as President, I will help lead this conversation — and more importantly, I will listen, just as I did today visiting the site of last night's protests in Wilmington”.

Oh no wait, my mistake. It wasn't Trump who said this, it was Biden. It should have been Trump saying it, but he doesn't have the first clue what being a leader is about.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on June 02, 2020, 07:25:14 PM
The most Presidential thing that 45 has ever said:

Oh no wait, my mistake. It wasn't Trump who said this, it was Biden. It should have been Trump saying it, but he doesn't have the first clue what being a leader is about.

talk is cheap. he's obviously using the moment to push his run for presidency. this is the same guy that not two weeks ago said black identity began and ended with whether or not a person was voting for him
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2020, 08:02:24 PM
talk is cheap. he's obviously using the moment to push his run for presidency. this is the same guy that not two weeks ago said black identity began and ended with whether or not a person was voting for him

Not really my point, which was that someone who has never been President managed to make a more Presidential speech than anything that has left the mouth of someone who has been in the job for almost a whole term. It was a criticism of Trump, not an endorsement of Biden (although FWIW I think that your characterisation of what he said is a bit reductive and lacking in context).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on June 02, 2020, 08:07:21 PM
talk is cheap. he's obviously using the moment to push his run for presidency. this is the same guy that not two weeks ago said black identity began and ended with whether or not a person was voting for him
If he didn't say anything, people would say he's hiding.

If he says something, he's "obviously using the moment to push his run for presidency."

Obviously, there are political reasons for doing this, but that's also not the point.

Trump could easily say something like that. Bush would have come up with something similar. At least pretend to give a excrement like Biden is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 02, 2020, 08:07:57 PM


a bit reductive and lacking

Biden 2020 campaign slogan
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 02, 2020, 09:18:17 PM
Not really my point, which was that someone who has never been President managed to make a more Presidential speech than anything that has left the mouth of someone who has been in the job for almost a whole term. It was a criticism of Trump, not an endorsement of Biden (although FWIW I think that your characterisation of what he said is a bit reductive and lacking in context).
Yes, Trump should softened his tone and risen to the occasion with a more conciliatory and humbler feel (however doubtful).  But what would be the reaction?  The die's been cast and the line's are already drawn: either 'atta boy!' from his red meat base or derision from everyone else.  Trump's general obnoxiousness aside, the point is that it's already a moot 'damned if he does, damed if he doesn't' point.  That said, imo d sword's reference to Biden's presumptuous white privilege criteria as to what constitutes blackness was very germane  ..even if it wasn't really your point.   
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 02, 2020, 09:51:37 PM
Yes, Trump should've softened the tone and risen to the occasion with a more conciliatory and (not possible) humbler tone.  But what would be the reaction?  The die's been cast and the line's are already drawn: either 'atta boy!' from his red meat base or derision from everyone else.  Trump general obnoxiousness aside, the point is that it's already a moot 'damned if he does, damed if he doesn't' point.  That said, imo d sword's reference to Biden's presumptuous white privilege criteria as to what constitutes blackness was very germane  ..even if it wasn't really your point.   

With regards to 45: The point is that he is the President and the safety and security of this country is his duty.
If he is damned either way, the logical choice would be standing before the country to urge peace and try to ease tensions. He is charged with preserving American lives and institutions. Instead he consistently chooses to increase tentions and insight discontent, bellowing the rhetoric of a strongman. When presented with the opportunity to do the right thing he chose to placate those who wish for a tough guy instead of a leader.

With regards to Biden: We can consider that he actually meant it. He's been a gaffe machine his whole career so "You ain't black!" disgusting as it was, is around par for the course. He needs to say something about this to his party to try and recover. But maybe, just maybe, he also meant it.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 02, 2020, 10:03:34 PM
Congrats to Steve King on his future job at Fox News
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 02, 2020, 10:19:28 PM
With regards to 45: The point is that he is the President and the safety and security of this country is his duty.
If he is damned either way, the logical choice would be standing before the country to urge peace and try to ease tensions. He is charged with preserving American lives and institutions. Instead he consistently chooses to increase tentions and insight discontent, bellowing the rhetoric of a strongman. When presented with the opportunity to do the right thing he chose to placate those who wish for a tough guy instead of a leader.

With regards to Biden: We can consider that he actually meant it. He's been a gaffe machine his whole career so "You ain't black!" disgusting as it was, is around par for the course. He needs to say something about this to his party to try and recover. But maybe, just maybe, he also meant it.

Good points.  As for Biden, I don't doubt for a second the sincerity of his latest comments.  It was just the assuming, presumptuous tone of his 'blackness' blurting that I found off-putting (his penchant for gaffes aside), esp. now when sensitivities and a sense of discretion should be razor sharp (yes, Biden and razor-sharp aren't roommates but still.....anyway......point taken). 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 02, 2020, 10:45:58 PM

Good points.  As for Biden, I don't doubt for a second the sincerity of his latest comments.  It was just the assuming, presumptuous tone of his 'blackness' blurting that I found off-putting (his penchant for gaffes aside), esp. now when sensitivities and a sense of discretion should be razor sharp (yes, Biden and razor-sharp aren't roommates but still.....anyway......point taken). 

They were pretty poorly judged comments from him, but also consider that white people have a massively varying range of social experience with black people. I have known and I'm sure you know white people who have grown up so utterly part of black communities, usually as mathematical minorities in their own neighbourhoods, that using the term "nigga" is complete natural to them and to their friends and of no consequence, and they are completely comfortable and natural sounding doing so. Most of us, regardless of our level of wokeness and of our heart and our intellectual commitment to equality, couldn't possibly hope to sound anything other than horribly awkward and ill judged at best if we were to do the same.

I don't know enough about Biden's upbringing and history to know where he sits on that particular scale, but I do know that he is a career politician who pretty much on the left side of the tracks as a result of his objection to local Republican racial politics and then went on to serve the first black President in history. It doesn't seem like a huge leap of faith to think that Biden is incredibly comfortable around black people and isn't someone who is uncomfortable talking about colour and race.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MoreCharacters on June 02, 2020, 11:00:11 PM
the only people who care about Biden's comment to Charlemagne are white people who dislike Biden

it's amazing it's being talked about while America is burning
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 02, 2020, 11:36:03 PM
the only people who care about Biden's comment to Charlemagne are white people who dislike Biden

it's amazing it's being talked about while America is burning

I just thought it was a funny quote but

Quote
BET co-founder Robert L. Johnson said Biden should apologize to "every black person he meets."

"Vice President Biden’s statement today represents the arrogant and out-of-touch attitude of a paternalistic white candidate who has the audacity to tell black people, the descendants of slaves, that they are not black unless they vote for him," Johnson told Fox News last week.

"This proves unequivocally that the Democratic nominee believes that black people owe him their vote without question; even though, we as black people know it is exactly the opposite. He should spend the rest of his campaign apologizing to every black person he meets."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on June 03, 2020, 02:05:10 AM
the only people who care about Biden's comment to Charlemagne are white people who dislike Biden

it's amazing it's being talked about while America is burning

first off, while i am ethnically caucasian i am not 'white'. again, even though ethnically i am derived from a people coming from the range of the caucasus, knowing me most/all americans would likely consider me a brown minority. now that that's out of the way, i have black friends and colleagues who were pissed at what he said

i feel it's very relevant to the current events going on, as it was yet another example of a rich white privileged politician minimizing the black voice and black identity to whatever he/she wanted it to be. part of the current issues at hand includes the unfortunate fact that blacks voices are not valued, so him deciding to speak on this in light of all of that was very rich immo

with regards to the other posts, i honestly wouldn't have cared and wouldn't have been critical had biden decided not to say anything. similarly, i haven't gotten all up in arms about what trump has been saying as it's been status quo with his usual schtick of sowing discord amongst the people.

i stick by my original comment RE 'talk is cheap', and would rather see actual action/policy change rather than the fluff we're always given.

what was more beneficial for the black community, this current situation, and our country as a whole - the speech biden gave today or his 94 crime bill? 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on June 03, 2020, 06:56:10 AM
the only people who care about Biden's comment to Charlemagne are white people who dislike Biden

it's amazing it's being talked about while America is burning
I originally thought this to be true about found out like D swordz that this is not the case.

Black people were pissed!  Ask your community see how they felt. Curious what they would say
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 03, 2020, 07:34:25 AM


I don't know enough about Biden's upbringing and history to know where he sits on that particular scale, but I do know that he is a career politician who pretty much on the left side of the tracks

I'm revoking your lefty card, your standards are nonexistent
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 03, 2020, 07:37:51 AM
The Biden gaffe was bad, I just don't think something like that should have been a surprise.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 03, 2020, 07:43:53 AM
The Biden gaffe was bad, I just don't think something like that should have been a surprise.
It's just deeply demoralizing that after watching Republican voters fall in line and pretend the emperor has clothes for Trump, that an unstoppable number of Dems could not muster a better answer than doing the same for Biden.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 03, 2020, 08:33:34 AM

I'm revoking your lefty card, your standards are nonexistent

Cool, I don't carry it anyway. Some of my views are slightly to the left of centre (at least in countries in which the Overton doesn't place virulent racists in "moderate") but I've never claimed or wanted to be a placard carrying Marxist. I'm a salesman, FFS. My career is built upon success at the expense of others.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 03, 2020, 08:36:37 AM
Cool, I don't carry it anyway. Some of my views are slightly to the left of centre (at least in countries in which the Overton doesn't place virulent racists in "moderate") but I've never claimed or wanted to be a placard carrying Marxist. I'm a salesman, FFS. My career is built upon success at the expense of others.

DRAIN THE SWAMP
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 03, 2020, 11:26:14 AM
They were pretty poorly judged comments from him, but also consider that white people have a massively varying range of social experience with black people. I have known and I'm sure you know white people who have grown up so utterly part of black communities, usually as mathematical minorities in their own neighbourhoods, that using the term "nigga" is complete natural to them and to their friends and of no consequence, and they are completely comfortable and natural sounding doing so. Most of us, regardless of our level of wokeness and of our heart and our intellectual commitment to equality, couldn't possibly hope to sound anything other than horribly awkward and ill judged at best if we were to do the same.

I don't know enough about Biden's upbringing and history to know where he sits on that particular scale, but I do know that he is a career politician who pretty much on the left side of the tracks as a result of his objection to local Republican racial politics and then went on to serve the first black President in history. It doesn't seem like a huge leap of faith to think that Biden is incredibly comfortable around black people and isn't someone who is uncomfortable talking about colour and race.

Where the exact tipping point between upbringing-based cultural diffusion and the suburban 'wigger quotient' lies may be too nuanced a call for me but to leave it there would be a copout so here goes:  whatever Biden's comfort level around African Americans is (and recall that I  mentioned 'not doubting for a second' the sincerity of his 'presidential-like' commentary on Monday ), imho that still doesn't excuse his sloppy presumptuousness given that his upbringing hardly suggests hood/street cred, i.e. the white-in-a-black-hood minority status you described earlier.  In addition, you'd think that a Senator-turned-Vice-President who obviously knows how to work a room would have enough life seasoning let alone the political chops to not even go there, and with a sense of expectation no less.  Me, I don't think Biden's a bad dude, hardly.  Frankly, I think his background suggests he's got a lazy streak in him and he's gotten by in part via his twinkly-eyed Irish charm, i.e. the classic "kissing babies" campaigner type...someone who sells it but who leaves the heavy lifting to others.   regards and my best to your handsome, whisky-coveting dawg.



the only people who care about Biden's comment to Charlemagne

 are white people who dislike Biden

it's amazing it's being talked about while America is burning
Yup, that must be it.   Dismissing a viewpoint (whenever it is) with nothing more than a sweeping generalization is either "in the interest of brevity" or it's intellectual sloth and in this case (and speaking for myself) it doesn't automatically default to "must be a Trumper...sniff."   Note how @insanity processed it: looking past his initial take to consider what others were thinking.  In this case, not running it by his own (presumably white) filter but observing the even more relevant take from black circles.  My point is that the opinion itself is not the issue so much as the thought of shutting something down with identity politic labeling.  That's what's "amazing."  jmho 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 03, 2020, 11:33:35 AM

Where the exact tipping point between upbringing-based cultural diffusion and the suburban 'wigger quotient' lies may be too nuanced a call for me but to leave it there would be a copout so here goes:  whatever Biden's comfort level around African Americans is (and recall that I  mentioned 'not doubting for a second' the sincerity of his 'presidential-like' commentary on Monday ), imho that still doesn't excuse his sloppy presumptuousness given that his upbringing hardly suggests hood/street cred, i.e. the white-in-a-black-hood minority status you described earlier.  In addition, you'd think that a Senator-turned-Vice-President who obviously knows how to work a room would have enough life seasoning let alone the political chops to not even go there, and with a sense of expectation no less.  Me, I don't think Biden's a bad dude, hardly.  Frankly, I think his background suggests he's got a lazy streak in him and he's gotten by in part via his twinkly-eyed Irish charm, i.e. the classic "kissing babies" campaigner type...someone who sells it but who leaves the heavy lifting to others.   regards and my best to your handsome, whisky-coveting dawg.

Yes, I agree with all of that. I did say that I think his comments were ill judged; for all I care he could have grown up in the projects as the adopted child of black parents, with black siblings, been the only white kid in a black school, and be known as simply one of the boys from the corner by all his peers, as an experienced politician he should know better than to say something like that, both from a political and a human perspective. I'm not trying to excuse what he said, just understand why it might have been something that would come into his head to say.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on June 03, 2020, 12:38:33 PM
the suburban 'wigger quotient'

(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/51/25/1b/51251be487390eede7669363a3ea20ac.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on June 03, 2020, 02:24:17 PM
Thought this was pretty informative and fair.  Per usual read, trust, and fact check with AP and Reuters

(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/91465044_10218969799494537_4460740483731161088_o.jpg?_nc_cat=100&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=F2VqCX053QwAX_T92pM&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.xx&_nc_tp=7&oh=822f6247aa7aed7a8061da39473364e7&oe=5EFD82EF)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 03, 2020, 03:01:29 PM
I get most of my news from The Alex Jones Show now that he’s been deplatformed from Infowars/society
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 03, 2020, 03:02:13 PM
Thought this was pretty informative and fair.  Per usual read, trust, and fact check with AP and Reuters

(https://scontent-lga3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/s960x960/91465044_10218969799494537_4460740483731161088_o.jpg?_nc_cat=100&_nc_sid=8024bb&_nc_ohc=F2VqCX053QwAX_T92pM&_nc_ht=scontent-lga3-1.xx&_nc_tp=7&oh=822f6247aa7aed7a8061da39473364e7&oe=5EFD82EF)


I think I'll do what all the cool kids are doing in relation to this graph and pull out an Alan Moore quote, "Who Watches The Watchmen."

There is much that is disagreeable with this graph.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 03, 2020, 03:15:27 PM
Quote
Perhaps if the officers had been arrested quickly, these methods would have worked, but without the arrests and charges against the killer cops — which was the most basic demand of the uprisings — the movement grew and grew. The lip service of solidarity from the Democratic politicians was not enough. The firing of the four cops in Minneapolis was not enough. The pleas to “let the legal system do its work” enraged people further, and the third-degree charge for Derek Chauvin was an insult.

And so the movement continued to spread. Unable to contain this rebellion, the corporate media and political establishment of both parties worked to change the narrative. The primary strategy was to focus on the “outside agitators.” With lightning speed, the liberal and conservative factions of the ruling class united around this talking point. From the “progressive” Democratic mayors up to Donald Trump himself, all have characterized the movement as “hijacked” by violent extremists, especially scapegoating anarchists and the far-left.

Now Donald Trump calls for law enforcement’s “total domination” of the streets, and brags of attacks against D.C. protests the likes of which “the District has never seen before.”

But it is the liberal bourgeoisie — the Democratic mayors and governors and congressional leaders like Nancy Pelosi — who have facilitated Trump’s latest attacks. They invented and propagated all of the political justifications that Trump and Attorney General Barr needed. They, not the White House, imposed unjust curfews that now lay the basis for the mass arrests of people exercising their free-speech rights. The curfews strengthen the police state and normalize police violence, which will be focused on the new wave of anti-racist rebellion. These same Democratic politicians did absolutely nothing against the heavily armed, nearly all-white right-wing “reopen” protests, which took place at the height of the pandemic and which were in direct violation of the lockdown.

That this Democratic establishment touts itself as the anti-Trump “resistance” is a complete joke. In truth, it has long been the velvet glove over the iron fist of state repression.

Nor can anyone pass over that so many rebellions are taking place in urban areas governed entirely by the Democratic Party. This is the main reason the Democratic Party is unable to present a political leadership that will satisfy the anti-racist movement — this movement is objectively rebelling against them as much as Trump! It is in the cities that Democrats govern where the recent police killings have taken place, where killings have gone on for decades without any justice, where gentrification has expelled Black people from their historic neighborhoods, and where budget cuts have hollowed out health services and education. No amount of rhetoric can cover up that record.

Barack Obama published an essay lecturing protesters on how to make “real change,” with more “specific demands for criminal justice” and electoral efforts. But how can anyone take this advice seriously? His own administration made no “real change” over eight years of rampant police killings and mass incarceration — despite the massive Black Lives Matter movement and uprisings in Ferguson and Baltimore.

So when Trump complains about the “weakness” of the Democratic politicians against the movement, he voices the sentiments of many within the corporate and financial establishment who see that the Democrats’ typical containment strategies are not working. At this stage, with the movement so widespread, with the feeling of rebellion capturing the minds and hearts of millions, only first-degree murder charges for all the killer cops as well as the cessation of new police killings could potentially get people to go home and out of the streets. And the state refuses to concede this basic demand. So outright repression is their alternative.

https://www.liberationnews.org/rebellion-and-repression-capitalisms-long-hot-summer-begins/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on June 03, 2020, 03:37:34 PM

I think I'll do what all the cool kids are doing in relation to this graph and pull out an Alan Moore quote, "Who Watches The Watchmen."

There is much that is disagreeable with this graph.
Its an infographic that organizes new coverage by biases and analysis vs opinion.  If you want to agree how far right or left something should go or up and down, go for your freaking life.  But as a whole this is a good depiction of objective vs subjective and left vs right with the truth being AP and Reuters are the most trustworthy news outlets.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 03, 2020, 03:41:52 PM
https://www.liberationnews.org/rebellion-and-repression-capitalisms-long-hot-summer-begins/

Fairy sure that I'm not going to set a huge amount of store by the view of Liberation News ("Newspaper of the Party for Socialism and Liberation"), but I did at least read the piece you quoted. Much there to have a problem with, but I kind of got stuck on this:

Quote
Perhaps if the officers had been arrested quickly, these methods would have worked, but without the arrests and charges against the killer cops — which was the most basic demand of the uprisings — the movement grew and grew. The lip service of solidarity from the Democratic politicians was not enough. The firing of the four cops in Minneapolis was not enough. The pleas to “let the legal system do its work” enraged people further, and the third-degree charge for Derek Chauvin was an insult.

I'm no lawyer, but I don't think anyone of sound mind really wants to live in a society where the speed and severity of arrests and charges for an offense are determined by the size and volume of a mob. It seems to me that a speedy arrest and charge for the obvious offense (Chauvin charged with murder 3 for kneeling on Floyd's neck) was sensible and timely, not an insult, and taking a few days longer to consider all the evidence (some of which, including further videos, came to light after the protests had begun) before upgrading his charge to murder 2 as well as arresting and charging the other 3 officers is a legitimate and just process to follow.

I can understand why people, particularly some sections of the community, would feel like judicial decisions are unfairly weighted against them, and I have sympathy for that view. Raging at the process at this stage seems way off the mark though, especially when it looks to be working correctly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 03, 2020, 03:49:52 PM
I get most of my news from The Alex Jones Show now that he’s been deplatformed from Infowars/society
I get my news solely from Jose Canseco.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 03, 2020, 03:54:33 PM
I get my news solely from Jose Canseco.

You laugh, but I remember everyone immediately moving to discredit Juiced when it came out.

Oops.

Speaking of Jose, this home run has been buried into my head for about 20 years because of what a freaking moonshot it was https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3hNyAByEH8
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 03, 2020, 03:55:11 PM
Fairy sure that I'm not going to set a huge amount of store by the view of Liberation News ("Newspaper of the Party for Socialism and Liberation"), but I did at least read the piece you quoted. Much there to have a problem with, but I kind of got stuck on this:

I'm no lawyer, but I don't think anyone of sound mind really wants to live in a society where the speed and severity of arrests and charges for an offense are determined by the size and volume of a mob. It seems to me that a speedy arrest and charge for the obvious offense (Chauvin charged with murder 3 for kneeling on Floyd's neck) was sensible and timely, not an insult, and taking a few days longer to consider all the evidence (some of which, including further videos, came to light after the protests had begun) before upgrading his charge to murder 2 as well as arresting and charging the other 3 officers is a legitimate and just process to follow.

I can understand why people, particularly some sections of the community, would feel like judicial decisions are unfairly weighted against them, and I have sympathy for that view. Raging at the process at this stage seems way off the mark though, especially when it looks to be working correctly.

I cannot possibly imagine what more time the judicial system needed when Chauvin was initially arrested and charged this weekend but the other three were still walking free. Tou Thao was standing there, staring at Chauvin and doing nothing for the duration of the video. The cops and DA had enough to at least have him arrested with Chauvin and enough on both to bring them in sooner than they did. They were protected because they were cops. That’s the point.

The same amount of evidence was available to the Pittsburgh Police for that little excrement in the ALF hoodie and bandana tagging and and breaking windows on a police cruiser. PGH authorities had an arrest warrant issued for him within 24 hours of that video getting published.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 03, 2020, 04:00:43 PM
I cannot possibly imagine what more time the judicial system needed when Chauvin was initially arrested and charged this weekend but the other three were still walking free. Tou Thao was standing there, staring at Chauvin and doing nothing for the duration of the video. The cops and DA had enough to at least have him arrested with Chauvin and enough on both to bring them in sooner than they did. They were protected because they were cops. That’s the point.

The same amount of evidence was available to the Pittsburgh Police for that little excrement in the ALF hoodie and bandana tagging and and breaking windows on a police cruiser. PGH authorities had an arrest warrant issued for him within 24 hours of that video getting published.

Isn't the point though that it's better to take an extra day or two, properly review all of the evidence and then arrest them, knowing what you're going to charge them with and how you're going to support that argument? If you arrest and undercharge you get immediately accused of going soft, then when you increase the charges you get accused of acceding to mob demands. If you arrest and overcharge then you get accused of letting them off the hook when you have to downgrade the charges to what you can actually make stick.

I think the key point is that in all cases, but particularly such high profile ones as this, it's best if the legal system gets it right from the outset. If it takes them an extra day or two to map the charges out, especially given the total impossibility of flight for any of the four, that seems like a fair price to pay.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 03, 2020, 04:08:35 PM
Isn't the point though that it's better to take an extra day or two, properly review all of the evidence and then arrest them, knowing what you're going to charge them with and how you're going to support that argument? If you arrest and undercharge you get immediately accused of going soft, then when you increase the charges you get accused of acceding to mob demands. If you arrest and overcharge then you get accused of letting them off the hook when you have to downgrade the charges to what you can actually make stick.

I think the key point is that in all cases, but particularly such high profile ones as this, it's best if the legal system gets it right from the outset. If it takes them an extra day or two to map the charges out, especially given the total impossibility of flight for any of the four, that seems like a fair price to pay.

No.

The fact that Chauvin’s charges were upgraded today, 5 days after his initial arrest should probably let you know that the accused don’t have to be allowed to walk around free in order for authorities to gather further evidence.

I live in a city full of lawyers. I have not had a single lawyer tell me that the Minneapolis DA was right to wait or that there was anything missing in the open source resources that would have been grounds to delay taking all four of them into custody.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 03, 2020, 04:20:22 PM
No.

The fact that Chauvin’s charges were upgraded today, 5 days after his initial arrest should probably let you know that the accused don’t have to be allowed to walk around free in order for authorities to gather further evidence.

I live in a city full of lawyers. I have not had a single lawyer tell me that the Minneapolis DA was right to wait or that there was anything missing in the open source resources that would have been grounds to delay taking all four of them into custody.

Lmao, good going brainlet, you just made the argument against bail reform.

I can only imagine how the state would manipulate that very ethic to keep poor people in freaking jail.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 03, 2020, 04:21:29 PM
Lmao, good going brainlet, you just made the argument against bail reform.

I can only imagine how the state would manipulate that very ethic to keep poor people in freaking jail.



Can’t be on bail if you are not arrested first. But please keep reaching. Do you really have nothing else better to do than follow me or Heis around on this message board?

I miss DCM
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 03, 2020, 04:34:25 PM
No.

The fact that Chauvin’s charges were upgraded today, 5 days after his initial arrest should probably let you know that the accused don’t have to be allowed to walk around free in order for authorities to gather further evidence.

I live in a city full of lawyers. I have not had a single lawyer tell me that the Minneapolis DA was right to wait or that there was anything missing in the open source resources that would have been grounds to delay taking all four of them into custody.

OK, but I don't see what was lost by waiting. By definition the legal system has to operate outside and independent of mob rule. If there are reasons why the legal system could or should have been more efficient in this case then I'm willing to listen, but "it might have made the protests less violent" isn't one I'm willing to accept. For one I don't believe it would have made any different to the protests, and for another the idea of a legal system whose behaviour is dictated by fear of mob repercussions is frankly terrifying. That's only one step removed from the return of lynching.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 03, 2020, 04:35:54 PM
Can’t be on bail if you are not arrested first. But please keep reaching. Do you really have nothing else better to do than follow me or Heis around on this message board?

I miss DCM

What? That has nothing to do with anything. He was arrested. They upgraded the charges while he's been in custody.

You literally described the thought process behind prosecutors and judges when they set sky high bail on people irrespective of the enumerated factors in order to keep them in jail.

Your inability to see the logical end result of the excrement you spew in a situation where its applied against you is remarkable.
DCM mode engaged is right.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 03, 2020, 04:53:33 PM
What? That has nothing to do with anything. He was arrested. They upgraded the charges while he's been in custody.

You literally described the thought process behind prosecutors and judges when they set sky high bail on people irrespective of the enumerated factors in order to keep them in jail.

Your inability to see the logical end result of the excrement you spew in a situation where its applied against you is remarkable.
DCM mode engaged is right.



The whole point was that they should have arrested the other three sooner. I also never discussed denying them bail. I said the Minnesota authorities didn't have to wait to get more evidence because what they had was sufficient and the investigation process doesn't end with the arrest.

The sad thing is I know you're not better than this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 03, 2020, 04:55:16 PM
You laugh, but I remember everyone immediately moving to discredit Juiced when it came out.

Oops.

Speaking of Jose, this home run has been buried into my head for about 20 years because of what a freaking moonshot it was https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=t3hNyAByEH8

When I think of Jose Canseco this is what I think of:

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=Foi-McBulkw
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 03, 2020, 05:00:59 PM

I think I'll do what all the cool kids are doing in relation to this graph and pull out an Alan Moore quote, "Who Watches The Watchmen."

There is much that is disagreeable with this graph.
Its an infographic that organizes new coverage by biases and analysis vs opinion.  If you want to agree how far right or left something should go or up and down, go for your freaking life.  But as a whole this is a good depiction of objective vs subjective and left vs right with the truth being AP and Reuters are the most trustworthy news outlets.
I take issue not only with the placements but also the categories themselves.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 03, 2020, 05:03:00 PM
I take issue not only with the placements but also the categories themselves.

Depends whether the graph is drawn in the current Overton context or the absolute spectrum.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 03, 2020, 05:21:07 PM
OK, but I don't see what was lost by waiting. By definition the legal system has to operate outside and independent of mob rule. If there are reasons why the legal system could or should have been more efficient in this case then I'm willing to listen, but "it might have made the protests less violent" isn't one I'm willing to accept. For one I don't believe it would have made any different to the protests, and for another the idea of a legal system whose behaviour is dictated by fear of mob repercussions is frankly terrifying. That's only one step removed from the return of lynching.

We don't know whether or not the protests would have happened or not but nothing was gained, either. I'd argue that the police response to the protests was what helped spur on protests in other cities and escalated the response from the crowd. The death of George Floyd was certainly the spark but it alone was not the what got us to where we are now.

In a sense the MPD and DA's failure to act will likely come to be realized as the catalyst that will hopefully drive a massive amount of reform in the actions of the police and the way elected officials ensure that police abuse is curbed but if they weren't cops they would have been arrested sooner.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 03, 2020, 05:26:00 PM
Depends whether the graph is drawn in the current Overton context or the absolute spectrum.
Even the current narrow window still needs to show a demonstrable left/liberal divide.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 03, 2020, 05:42:15 PM
We don't know whether or not the protests would have happened or not but nothing was gained, either. I'd argue that the police response to the protests was what helped spur on protests in other cities and escalated the response from the crowd. The death of George Floyd was certainly the spark but it alone was not the what got us to where we are now.

In a sense the MPD and DA's failure to act will likely come to be realized as the catalyst that will hopefully drive a massive amount of reform in the actions of the police and the way elected officials ensure that police abuse is curbed but if they weren't cops they would have been arrested sooner.

Absent a window into an alternate universe we'll never know the truth of your first point, but I'd still on balance prefer a legal system that takes its time to get the most high profile and important of cases right the first time.

I agree with your second point completely.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 03, 2020, 05:44:24 PM
Even the current narrow window still needs to show a demonstrable left/liberal divide.

As long as the right/liberal divide is on the same scale, then the scale is fine. You can make an argument that they could have made it wider, both to bring it into uniformity with the y-axis and to make it more legible.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on June 03, 2020, 05:50:11 PM
As long as the right/liberal divide is on the same scale, then the scale is fine. You can make an argument that they could have made it wider, both to bring it into uniformity with the y-axis and to make it more legible.
Precisely.  Arguing how much further up and to right a news provider should be is not the point.  They're relative to each other and on an equal scale.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on June 03, 2020, 06:03:21 PM
when i think of jose canseco the first thing that comes to mind is the 'im jose canseco bitch' lines for the red power ranger in the power rangers gangster crab video
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 03, 2020, 07:14:13 PM
Precisely.  Arguing how much further up and to right a news provider should be is not the point.  They're relative to each other and on an equal scale.

No they're not. Not in the least. That actually was my argument. The proportionality of partisanism is way off.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 03, 2020, 08:18:45 PM
Even the current narrow window still needs to show a demonstrable left/liberal divide.

100% agree. There’s currently a lot of idealogical split on the left imo. Conservatives see eye to eye on main platform topics from what I’ve seen.

freak the 2 party system
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 03, 2020, 08:35:59 PM
No they're not. Not in the least. That actually was my argument. The proportionality of partisanism is way off.

Neither you nor Badger has a legitimate view on this given your respective locations on the scale. He thinks you're Genghis Khan and you think he's Karl Marx.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 03, 2020, 08:36:24 PM
Conservatives see eye to eye on main platform topics from what I’ve seen.

LOL
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 03, 2020, 09:04:19 PM
Neither you nor Badger has a legitimate view on this given your respective locations on the scale. He thinks you're Genghis Khan and you think he's Karl Marx.

Actually, insane as Badg's positions as I sometimes find, his ability to be remarkably consistent in it and recognize the anti-Drumpf grift even if he hates the Orange Man is something I've always respected.

I'll never hate on intellectual consistency.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 03, 2020, 09:09:13 PM
Actually, insane as Badg's positions as I sometimes find, his ability to be remarkably consistent in it and recognize the anti-Drumpf grift even if he hates the Orange Man is something I've always respected.

I'll never hate on intellectual consistency.

I respect both of your positions (with reservations) and your ability to argue them, even though I disagree with both to varying degrees.

The point is that both of you are statistical outliers when it comes to judging political spectrum and therefore both have skewed views. I'm sure you think that the NYT is pretty left wing, just as I'm sure Badger decries it for being not even remotely left wing. The graph has it about right.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on June 03, 2020, 09:37:45 PM

I think I'll do what all the cool kids are doing in relation to this graph and pull out an Alan Moore quote, "Who Watches The Watchmen."

You can yourself! https://www.adfontesmedia.com/white-paper-multi-analyst-ratings-project-august-2019/?v=402f03a963ba
They have a lot of information about their ongoing attempts at objectivity and transparency throughout their website, along with an updated chart.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 03, 2020, 11:57:35 PM
I take issue with the chart's use of "partisan" and with its description of the orange boxes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 04, 2020, 12:03:17 AM
DailyKos literally banned criticism of Hillary from their site in 2016 yet they're further left than DemocracyNow?

Patribotics, a blog containing the incoherent ramblings of an insane woman (who happens to be a former Conservative member of UK Parliament) is somehow further left than two openly socialist publications?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on June 04, 2020, 12:33:34 AM
if there was a gay column on that chart, this board would be at the very top. we've had some gay derriere threads/arguments/conversations this offseason
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 04, 2020, 11:19:18 AM
DailyKos literally banned criticism of Hillary from their site in 2016 yet they're further left than DemocracyNow?

Patribotics, a blog containing the incoherent ramblings of an insane woman (who happens to be a former Conservative member of UK Parliament) is somehow further left than two openly socialist publications?

Holy freak Louise Mensch is still a thing?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 04, 2020, 11:21:51 AM
if there was a gay column on that chart, this board would be at the very top. we've had some gay derriere threads/arguments/conversations this offseason

Isn’t that the WWE thread?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 04, 2020, 02:43:30 PM
I haven't read the report yet so without the context for the deaths I'm not sure what to make of this story, but it does seem rather alarming.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/united-states-added-list-most-dangerous-countries-journalists-first-time-n949676
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 04, 2020, 02:46:05 PM
I haven't read the report yet so without the context for the deaths I'm not sure what to make of this story, but it does seem rather alarming.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/united-states-added-list-most-dangerous-countries-journalists-first-time-n949676

Combining the attitude of the Trump administration towards the press and the live action shots of journalists being pepper sprayed and arrested during the protests, this isn’t altogether surprising.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 04, 2020, 03:13:22 PM
I haven't read the report yet so without the context for the deaths I'm not sure what to make of this story, but it does seem rather alarming.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/united-states-added-list-most-dangerous-countries-journalists-first-time-n949676

63?!  What the freak happened in 2018, I can't even remember that far back.  Australian wildfires seem like a decade ago. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 04, 2020, 03:19:33 PM
It seems incorrect to lump journalist assassinations from heads of state in with good old fashioned American bullet blizzards
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on June 04, 2020, 06:02:35 PM
I haven't read the report yet so without the context for the deaths I'm not sure what to make of this story, but it does seem rather alarming.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/world/united-states-added-list-most-dangerous-countries-journalists-first-time-n949676

https://rsf.org/sites/default/files/worldwilde_round-up.pdf

Quote
The United States joined the ranks of the world’s deadliest countries for the media this year, with a total of six journalists killed. Four journalists were among the five employees of  the  Capital  Gazette,  a  local  newspaper  in  Annapolis,  Maryland,  who  were  killed  on  28 June when a man walked in and opened fire with a shotgun. He had been harassing the newspaper for six years on Twitter about a 2011 article that named him. It was the deadliest  attack  on  a  media  outlet  in  the  US  in  modern  history.  Two  other  journalists,  a  local TV anchor and cameraman, were killed by a falling tree while covering Subtropical Storm Alberto’s extreme weather in North Carolina in May.


What a crock of excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 04, 2020, 07:04:04 PM
https://rsf.org/sites/default/files/worldwilde_round-up.pdf


What a crock of excrement.

Didn't that happen way back in 18?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 04, 2020, 07:10:14 PM
https://rsf.org/sites/default/files/worldwilde_round-up.pdf


What a crock of excrement.

I'm OK with them using the shooting in Annapolis as they were targeted specifically because of their profession, and your gun laws make it possible for anyone with a grudge and a few bucks to go blasty-shooty on anyone else they have a problem with. The two guys killed by a falling tree while covering a storm though? C'mon.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 04, 2020, 07:20:43 PM
I'm OK with them using the shooting in Annapolis as they were targeted specifically because of their profession, and your gun laws make it possible for anyone with a grudge and a few bucks to go blasty-shooty on anyone else they have a problem with. The two guys killed by a falling tree while covering a storm though? C'mon.

True on the first point, but you know this is going to be presented as though they were attacked out of a political agenda and not a personal grudge.

I'm getting intimately acquainted with NY gun laws as I start the process of getting strapped. It's going to take half a year.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 05, 2020, 10:18:31 PM
(https://preview.redd.it/43whqva8d6351.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=9c43ab9e228bde92e0c519bea59746f40730139e)

Lindsey is a girl's name, I blame the parents. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 06, 2020, 12:48:18 AM
(https://preview.redd.it/43whqva8d6351.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=9c43ab9e228bde92e0c519bea59746f40730139e)

Lindsey is a girl's name, I blame the parents. 
Big if true.

But seriously wouldn’t be shocked at all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 08, 2020, 02:41:01 PM
https://twitter.com/comfortablysmug/status/1270048933360873472?s=21

Pelosi’s massive sweater meats affecting her ability to stand up
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 08, 2020, 02:45:43 PM
https://twitter.com/comfortablysmug/status/1270048933360873472?s=21

Pelosi’s massive sweater meats affecting her ability to stand up
#tittytribute
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 08, 2020, 02:47:32 PM
https://twitter.com/comfortablysmug/status/1270048933360873472?s=21

Pelosi’s massive sweater meats affecting her ability to stand up

The woman in pink looks like me trying to get up and go for the first pee of the session after five pints on an empty stomach.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on June 08, 2020, 02:53:43 PM
https://twitter.com/comfortablysmug/status/1270048933360873472?s=21

Pelosi’s massive sweater meats affecting her ability to stand up

Now i have the meats

#Arbys
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 08, 2020, 04:55:26 PM
https://twitter.com/comfortablysmug/status/1270048933360873472?s=21

Pelosi’s massive sweater meats affecting her ability to stand up
 
    massive 'sweater meats'

    #massivegrin
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 09, 2020, 07:33:59 AM
https://twitter.com/jordanpeele/status/1270130580445773824?s=21


Oooooof
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 09, 2020, 08:07:34 AM
This was cute. Actually passing legislation to limit police power and abuse would have been a much better expenditure of their time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 09, 2020, 09:27:47 AM
This was cute. Actually passing legislation to limit police power and abuse would have been a much better expenditure of their time.
Yeah but how are you gonna pay for it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 09, 2020, 09:31:02 AM
Yeah but how are you gonna pay for it

Ramp up traffic stops/ticketing of civilians for minor infractions
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 09, 2020, 09:33:37 AM
Ramp up traffic stops/ticketing of civilians for minor infractions
But how are you gonna pay for that
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 09, 2020, 09:35:22 AM
But how are you gonna pay for that
Porn. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 09, 2020, 09:37:46 AM
Porn.
But how are you gonna get that past the Senate?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 09, 2020, 09:58:40 AM
But how are you gonna get that past the Senate?

Gay porn.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 09, 2020, 10:25:09 AM
Gay porn.
Lady G is listening
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 09, 2020, 10:25:40 AM
Sneak preview of November, this whole Twitter thread

https://twitter.com/bluestein/status/1270312105128988684?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 09, 2020, 12:23:50 PM
Sneak preview of November, this whole Twitter thread

https://twitter.com/bluestein/status/1270312105128988684?s=19

Absentee ballot, son!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on June 09, 2020, 12:26:51 PM
Too hot for that excrement
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 09, 2020, 01:09:34 PM
Muh blue maga voter suppression
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 11, 2020, 09:01:56 AM
https://twitter.com/coreyrobin/status/1270469516682842117?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 11, 2020, 09:12:25 AM
What is a "Blue Dog"?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 11, 2020, 09:25:08 AM
What is a "Blue Dog"?

Blue Dogs are a nickname for Nancy Pelosi’s funbags
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 11, 2020, 09:51:24 AM
What is a "Blue Dog"?

Blue Dog Coalition (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Dog_Coalition)

Conservative-leaning Democrats with emphasis on conservative fiscal policy and defense spending.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 11, 2020, 09:57:19 AM
Blue Dog Coalition (https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blue_Dog_Coalition)

Conservative-leaning Democrats with emphasis on conservative fiscal policy and defense spending.

Huh, thanks. Not heard of that before.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 11, 2020, 10:04:44 AM
Blue Dogs are a nickname for Nancy Pelosi’s funbags
Can confirm.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 11, 2020, 10:14:29 AM
Can confirm.

   Second

   https://twitter.com/NoeticChasm/status/1164003536809668610
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 11, 2020, 02:05:14 PM
What is a "Blue Dog"?
People you would emphatically support the moment a Republican enters your field of vision
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 11, 2020, 02:05:49 PM
https://twitter.com/coreyrobin/status/1270469516682842117?s=21
Launch them into the freaking sun
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 11, 2020, 02:07:11 PM
People you would emphatically support the moment a Republican enters your field of vision

Hahaha. It's a fair cop guv.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 11, 2020, 02:10:33 PM
THE SUN

https://twitter.com/AntifaQueen/status/1271061351159541763?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 15, 2020, 09:17:01 AM
https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1272529876080381954?s=19

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 15, 2020, 09:18:34 AM
https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1272523602814959618?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 15, 2020, 10:12:14 AM
Streak ends at 2 good decisions

https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1272538774719913984?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on June 15, 2020, 11:51:46 AM
https://twitter.com/SCOTUSblog/status/1272529876080381954?s=19



Gorsuch is such a pleasure to read for a SCOTUS justice. Concise, to the point, hoi polloi writing.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 15, 2020, 12:29:55 PM
Gorsuch is such a pleasure to read for a SCOTUS justice. Concise, to the point, hoi polloi writing.

But hes a NAZI
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 15, 2020, 12:41:45 PM
But hes a NAZI
Glad he elevated LGBTQ worker rights to the same level as everyone else, which is approximately zero
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on June 15, 2020, 12:46:57 PM
Who are electing these people?!?

https://mobile.twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1272390385327837193

The comments are gold
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 15, 2020, 02:32:28 PM
Who are electing these people?!?

https://mobile.twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1272390385327837193

The comments are gold

My favorite thing I’ve seen written about Ted Cruz is that if Ron Pearlman would just insult Cruz’s wife then Cruz would endorse him for President.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 15, 2020, 02:43:35 PM
Back when Paris Hilton's phone contacts got leaked a thousand years ago I tried to call Ron Perlman, some woman answered and hung up on me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on June 15, 2020, 02:44:18 PM
Back when Paris Hilton's phone contacts got leaked a thousand years ago I tried to call Ron Perlman, some woman answered and hung up on me.

you probably called Rhea Perlman instead.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 19, 2020, 10:04:54 AM
Nothing odd about this at all.

https://www.yahoo.com/news/florida-rep-matt-gaetz-reveals-212637259.html

The Twitter replies are entertaining.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 20, 2020, 10:57:57 PM
The people who think AOC is dumb are huge retards 100% of the time

https://twitter.com/DeAnna4Congress/status/1274516975570628608?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 24, 2020, 07:26:30 AM
https://twitter.com/lanceveeser/status/1275664180994080768?s=21

This is normal

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2020/06/24/madison-police-protest-senator/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 24, 2020, 12:44:00 PM
Sorry to interrupt the concerted effort to delegitimize protests,

https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1275765555560091648?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 26, 2020, 03:49:59 PM
The House voted 238-180 today to grant DC statehood. It'll never make it past the Senate but this is still huge. First time either house has voted in favor of statehood for DC.   
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 26, 2020, 04:02:12 PM
The House voted 238-180 today to grant DC statehood. It'll never make it past the Senate but this is still huge. First time either house has voted in favor of statehood for DC.   

Florida was also voted out of statehood.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 26, 2020, 04:52:37 PM
Florida was also voted out of statehood.

I'm all for it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 26, 2020, 05:05:26 PM
The House voted 238-180 today to grant DC statehood. It'll never make it past the Senate but this is still huge. First time either house has voted in favor of statehood for DC.

  So the newly created state and its capital would be coterminous?    (I just wanted to use that word)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 26, 2020, 05:25:51 PM
  So the newly created state and its capital would be coterminous?    (I just wanted to use that word)
It's a perfectly cromulent word.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on June 26, 2020, 05:27:22 PM
It's a perfectly cromulent word.
CROM!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 26, 2020, 05:36:31 PM
CROM!
Cheese dust....straw.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on June 26, 2020, 05:41:58 PM
Cheese dust....straw.
6 demon bag
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 26, 2020, 08:01:52 PM
  So the newly created state and its capital would be coterminous?    (I just wanted to use that word)

Possibly. It's a moot point given that the Senate will block it and if it somehow got through, Trump would veto the bill. They'd be handing two Senate seats over to the Democrats.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 26, 2020, 08:03:11 PM
Possibly. It's a moot point given that the Senate will block it and if it somehow got through, Trump would veto the bill. They'd be handing two Senate seats over to the Democrats.

Just make Long Island a state to balance it out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 26, 2020, 08:50:28 PM
Just make Long Island a state to balance it out.
NYC plus Nassau and Suffolk minus Staten Island and you've got a deal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 27, 2020, 12:59:59 PM
Just make Long Island a state to balance it out.

https://twitter.com/tinaforte7/status/1273947416237084672?s=21

https://twitter.com/tinaforte7/status/1275427194622357504?s=21

I did it guys, I found the worst account on twitter
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 27, 2020, 01:00:43 PM
“This is how I run my Spartan races” 😂😂😂
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 27, 2020, 01:11:20 PM
“This is how I run my Spartan races” 😂😂😂

Amazing. I love this whole "I'm a warrior" mentality that people seem to develop doing Spartan and Tough Mudder and all that excrement. I've done Spartans and it's 90% fat idiots walking between obstacles and taking selfies for their social to show people what athletes they are. GTFO with that stupidity.

She is definitely one to add to the hate freak list.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 27, 2020, 01:25:58 PM
Amazing. I love this whole "I'm a warrior" mentality that people seem to develop doing Spartan and Tough Mudder and all that excrement. I've done Spartans and it's 90% fat idiots walking between obstacles and taking selfies for their social to show people what athletes they are. GTFO with that stupidity.

She is definitely one to add to the hate freak list.

I wouldn’t freak that with Bo’s ashy dick.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 27, 2020, 01:26:00 PM
Amazing. I love this whole "I'm a warrior" mentality that people seem to develop doing Spartan and Tough Mudder and all that excrement. I've done Spartans and it's 90% fat idiots walking between obstacles and taking selfies for their social to show people what athletes they are. GTFO with that stupidity.

She is definitely one to add to the hate freak list.
She would probably rip my dong off.  Plus I think she may have a penis.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 27, 2020, 09:59:00 PM
Love to legitimize grifters

https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1276964925127241728?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 27, 2020, 10:27:52 PM
Jim Jordan covered up sexual abuse at Ohio State. Jim Jordan can freak right he hell off the edge of a cliff.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 27, 2020, 10:42:26 PM
Love to legitimize grifters

https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1276964925127241728?s=19

Andy Ngo’s grift keeps Shaun King up at night
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 27, 2020, 10:54:56 PM
Andy Ngo’s grift keeps Shaun King up at night
 
  https://twitter.com/shaunking/status/1275106946916499456
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 05, 2020, 09:53:30 AM
This guy

https://twitter.com/KwCongressional/status/1279562816324763648?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 05, 2020, 10:15:31 AM
This guy

https://twitter.com/KwCongressional/status/1279562816324763648?s=19

Well played (https://twitter.com/rtyson82/status/1279660801423368193?s=20)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 06, 2020, 01:21:35 PM
https://twitter.com/citizenwillis/status/1280169210862329856?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 06, 2020, 03:21:17 PM
https://twitter.com/citizenwillis/status/1280169210862329856?s=19
The Goddamn Ayn Rand Institute. (https://twitter.com/patfitzgerald23/status/1280217058677084160?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 07, 2020, 08:13:17 AM
in b4 it's not a handout, just a colossal loan with an interest rate lower than the current rate of inflation
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 09, 2020, 01:16:43 PM
I won't pretend to be nearly clever enough to understand the full ramifications of this, but it seems like a fairly significant ruling.

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/07/09/us/supreme-court-oklahoma-mcgirt-creek-nation.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 09, 2020, 04:03:09 PM
Words fail to describe how much I despise sharing a party label with people who think like this

https://twitter.com/SailorHaumea/status/1280686533629087745?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 09, 2020, 04:46:29 PM
Words fail to describe how much I despise sharing a party label with people who think like this

https://twitter.com/SailorHaumea/status/1280686533629087745?s=19
That's utterly nonsensical.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 09, 2020, 06:56:05 PM
..(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200709/2456417bb8f38f8bea59fcc9041f7b50.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200709/80f92fc16419a2dbbdc467f3f6ca4a8d.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 09, 2020, 08:16:14 PM
Words fail to describe how much I despise sharing a party label with people who think like this

https://twitter.com/SailorHaumea/status/1280686533629087745?s=19

This is total horse excrement. How does one even twist their brian up enough to spurt that out?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 13, 2020, 04:17:04 PM
Complete your census folks

https://twitter.com/BethLynch2020/status/1282782087666438144?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 14, 2020, 10:43:30 AM
The replies from people upset about anti-racism are just wonderful

https://twitter.com/LPNational/status/1282992167393386498?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 14, 2020, 11:42:54 AM
“Let’s make the census cowboy proud”

Lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 14, 2020, 11:48:35 AM
The replies from people upset about anti-racism are just wonderful

https://twitter.com/LPNational/status/1282992167393386498?s=19

Most people claiming to be Libertarians easily fall into the Alt Right white supremacist philosophies. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 14, 2020, 05:58:32 PM
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/07/no-one-wants-to-go-to-trump-republican-convention-covid-florida

Didn't know that about DeSantis. That's a fun one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 14, 2020, 07:33:23 PM
Breaking news

Ruth Bader Ginsberg hospitalized with an infection
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8b/Larry_King_%2833142723990%29.jpg/320px-Larry_King_%2833142723990%29.jpg)


NYT Opinion Writer & Editor Bari Weiss resigns via a very bitter resignation letter.

https://www.bariweiss.com/resignation-letter
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 14, 2020, 09:26:06 PM
Breaking news

Ruth Bader Ginsberg hospitalized with an infection
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8b/Larry_King_%2833142723990%29.jpg/320px-Larry_King_%2833142723990%29.jpg)


NYT Opinion Writer & Editor Bari Weiss resigns via a very bitter resignation letter.

https://www.bariweiss.com/resignation-letter
Ruth Bader Kingsburg?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 16, 2020, 12:36:32 PM
PELOSI: “I yearn for other Republican presidents. While we may disagree on many points, at least we had a shared commitment to the governance of our country."

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 16, 2020, 01:39:11 PM
PELOSI: “I yearn for other Republican presidents. While we may disagree on many points, at least we had a shared commitment to the governance of our country."



Except how she probably treated Bush even worse than she did Trump
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on July 16, 2020, 02:28:35 PM
Complete your census folks

https://twitter.com/BethLynch2020/status/1282782087666438144?s=19

This is actually a good marketing idea.  Having the mascot be a cowboy in the city of chicago is idiotic though
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 16, 2020, 03:04:40 PM
Most people claiming to be Libertarians easily fall into the Alt Right white supremacist philosophies. 



This is total horse excrement. How does one even twist their brian up enough to spurt that out?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2020, 04:45:14 PM
There are absolutely a ton of people with heinous beliefs who wear the label.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 16, 2020, 05:03:07 PM
There are absolutely a ton of people with heinous beliefs who wear the label.

Stereotyping solves all problems
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2020, 06:17:55 PM
Stereotyping solves all problems
Not all libertarians are racists or pedophiles
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 16, 2020, 06:18:26 PM



Cute.

Every person I knew in DC who called themselves Libertarians when I first lived here are now alt-right assholes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 16, 2020, 06:51:53 PM
Cute.

Every person I knew in DC who called themselves Libertarians when I first lived here are now alt-right assholes.

Why do you keep in touch with so many alt right assholes?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 16, 2020, 07:05:19 PM
Why do you keep in touch with so many alt right assholes?

DCM is a parody account.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 17, 2020, 03:07:59 PM
RBG's cancer is back. Really need her to hang on for four more months.... oh no wait, McConnell said it's not appropriate to confirm a Supreme Court Judge during an election year, right?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 17, 2020, 11:15:42 PM
John Lewis died, for real this time
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 18, 2020, 01:16:15 AM
RBG's cancer is back. Really need her to hang on for four more months.... oh no wait, McConnell said it's not appropriate to confirm a Supreme Court Judge during an election year, right?

She’ll probably outlive McConnell.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 18, 2020, 06:58:45 AM
Defending a poll tax to own the libs

https://twitter.com/NBCNews/status/1283820690404184064?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 18, 2020, 09:25:26 PM
https://twitter.com/travisakers/status/1284597807928811522?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 18, 2020, 10:12:06 PM
https://twitter.com/travisakers/status/1284597807928811522?s=19

https://twitter.com/StarrburyMike/status/1284572361069662208?s=20 (https://twitter.com/StarrburyMike/status/1284572361069662208?s=20)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 19, 2020, 01:07:45 AM
I will admit they look damn near identical, but it's not hard to make sure before you post something.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 19, 2020, 01:52:35 AM
(https://thegrio.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/12/LewisCummings.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 19, 2020, 07:43:52 AM
I will admit they look damn near identical, but it's not hard to make sure before you post something.

What makes it worse is that these were photos with Rubio and Sullivan in them where they clearly interacted with Congressman Cummings. Did they think he was John Lewis while they were talking to him?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on July 19, 2020, 08:25:46 AM
What makes it worse is that these were photos with Rubio and Sullivan in them where they clearly interacted with Congressman Cummings. Did they think he was John Lewis while they were talking to him?

"hey another spook"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 20, 2020, 04:57:22 PM
Cancel culture is when someone takes any level of criticism for their words/actions and faces no material consequences and it's oUt Of CoNtRoL!

https://twitter.com/Jim_Jordan/status/1285239565557673988?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 20, 2020, 06:54:14 PM
https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/508158-rand-paul-no-place-for-feds-rounding-people-up-at-will-in-portland

Rand Paul temporarily remembering that he's supposed to be pretending to be a libertarian until McConnell makes a stern phone call telling him to get back in line.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on July 20, 2020, 09:36:48 PM
https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/1285395145098096640?s=20

Kanye West has lost his damn mind
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 20, 2020, 11:28:56 PM
https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/1285395145098096640?s=20

Kanye West has lost his damn mind

A family of billionaires with all the connections and resources to get him actual help and they just let him do this excrement because...ratings? The Kardashians and Wests are garbage people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 21, 2020, 06:57:47 AM
A family of billionaires with all the connections and resources to get him actual help and they just let him do this excrement because...ratings? The Kardashians and Wests are garbage people.

I mean the families claim to fame was helping a murderer go free and setting back race relations for the whole country

So them and Kanye is barely a drop in the bucket
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on July 21, 2020, 07:08:47 AM
I mean the families claim to fame was helping a murderer go free and setting back race relations for the whole country

So them and Kanye is barely a drop in the bucket

LMFAOOOOOOOOO dcm shows no hesitation in claiming that rob kardashian helping a black man go free from a crime he committed set race relations back in this country, but literally all of the other very real things causing racial divide within this country have been up for debate with him
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on July 21, 2020, 07:09:53 AM
https://twitter.com/kanyewest/status/1285395145098096640?s=20

Kanye West has lost his damn mind

he followed up those tweets by saying that kim wnts to photograph their kids for playboy, and that she is trying to get him 'locked up' and mentions a doctor, i'm assuming he means committed

he actually is unwell though

i want to see what chance the rapper has to say about kanye's unreal comments about harriet tubman

he is just sick
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on July 21, 2020, 07:19:17 AM
He is very likely having a psychotic break
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 21, 2020, 07:21:46 AM
LMFAOOOOOOOOO dcm shows no hesitation in claiming that rob kardashian helping a black man go free from a crime he committed set race relations back in this country, but literally all of the other very real things causing racial divide within this country have been up for debate with him

My opinions on the recent stuff haven't exactly been radical far right nonsense denying racism (at least I don't think so but I can't remember back past an hour ago so I can easily be wrong)

More like the police suck, but covid is literally 1000 times worse.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 21, 2020, 07:55:09 AM
he followed up those tweets by saying that kim wnts to photograph their kids for playboy, and that she is trying to get him 'locked up' and mentions a doctor, i'm assuming he means committed

he actually is unwell though

i want to see what chance the rapper has to say about kanye's unreal comments about harriet tubman

he is just sick

Dude needs to be in intensive psychiatric care.

I keep trying to justify “George Bush doesn’t care about black people,” with what I’ve seen from Kanye the last 5 years.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 21, 2020, 08:16:34 AM
LMFAOOOOOOOOO dcm shows no hesitation in claiming that rob kardashian helping a black man go free from a crime he committed set race relations back in this country, but literally all of the other very real things causing racial divide within this country have been up for debate with him
I was just grateful he found billionaires he won't simp for
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 21, 2020, 09:01:14 AM
Guys, he has an album coming out, this is all promo. God tier marketing
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 21, 2020, 09:39:49 AM
Guys, he has an album coming out, this is all promo. God tier marketing

  Live at Bellevue
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 21, 2020, 09:41:44 AM
  Live at Bellevue
Non-NYers missing out on this good reference
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on July 21, 2020, 09:54:43 AM
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/07/christian-conservative-speaker-of-the-ohio-house-arrested-in-60-million-bribery-case/

Quote
Christian Conservative Speaker of the Ohio House arrested in $60 million bribery case

Ohio’s Republican Speaker of the House Larry Householder was just arrested by federal authorities in a $60 million bribery and conspiracy case. Householder ran for office in 2018, saying: “I’m a Pro-Gun, Pro-Life, Christian Conservative with the highest NRA rating in Ohio’s history.”

Also arrested were an advisor to the Speaker, the state’s former GOP chairman, a former Ohio Civil Rights commissioner, a consultant, and Neil Clark, who boasts of being “one of the best-connected lobbyists in Columbus” on his company’s website.

A spokesperson for U.S. Attorney David DeVillers described the case as a “public corruption racketeering conspiracy involving $60 million,” the Cincinnati Enquirer also reports.

Saying, “this is about right and wrong,” Householder drew headlines last year when he attacked the Ohio Library Council, and a local library for being “a resource for teenage boys to learn how to dress in drag.”

The library had scheduled an event for teens which was to “include a drag queen makeup tutorial, crafts, a safe-sex program, and games,” NewNowNext reported. The event was relocated.

DeVillers has scheduled a 2:30 PM local time press conference.



I wonder how much money this dude has spent on hookers with dicks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 21, 2020, 09:55:53 AM
Larry Householder, was Wyatt Landowner too on-the-nose?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 21, 2020, 10:07:23 AM
Larry Householder, was Wyatt Landowner too on-the-nose?

Bob Smallbusinessman is busy with other things.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 23, 2020, 08:41:43 AM
https://twitter.com/Variety_TV/status/1285976418577334273?s=19

No
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on July 23, 2020, 09:35:34 AM
i don't think that's the first hilary-centric program done at hulu

is the alternate history going to revolve around somebody that isn't an evil, abhorrent person
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 23, 2020, 09:40:02 AM
https://twitter.com/Variety_TV/status/1285976418577334273?s=19

No

I don't know who this is made for. The only people still interested in her are Republicans desperately clinging onto their last boogeyman, and I can't imagine that most of them will care to watch it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on July 23, 2020, 09:48:28 AM
That's a worse idea than the Confederacy show HBO thought about doing. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 23, 2020, 12:12:59 PM
i don't think that's the first hilary-centric program done at hulu

is the alternate history going to revolve around somebody that isn't an evil, abhorrent person
Hulu also did the Hillary hagiography doc
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 23, 2020, 12:42:08 PM
That's a worse idea than the Confederacy show HBO thought about doing.
What if Hillary was the first woman president of the CSA?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 23, 2020, 12:49:27 PM


I don't know who this is made for. The only people still interested in her are Republicans desperately clinging onto their last boogeyman, and I can't imagine that most of them will care to watch it.

Not knowing about the die-hard Hillary sycophants is a significant blind spot in the bizarre landscape of US politics.

Did you know 1 in 4 Clinton primary supporters in 2008 voted for John McCain in the general election when she didn't get the nomination?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 23, 2020, 01:49:48 PM

Not knowing about the die-hard Hillary sycophants is a significant blind spot in the bizarre landscape of US politics.

Did you know 1 in 4 Clinton primary supporters in 2008 voted for John McCain in the general election when she didn't get the nomination?

But she hasn't been part of the political landscape for almost four years, and my feeling was that she was always more a candidate of convenience for most than one who engendered any particular passion. I'm sure she has a diehard base as all politicians do to some degree, but I can't imagine it's big enough to justify a retconned miniseries.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on July 23, 2020, 03:58:10 PM
But she hasn't been part of the political landscape for almost four years

she literally chimes in with needless, divisive, spiteful rhetoric any moment she can
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on July 23, 2020, 04:02:47 PM
What if Hillary was the first woman president of the CSA?

What if Hillary got blown by Monica Lewinsky? 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 23, 2020, 04:10:36 PM
she literally chimes in with needless, divisive, spiteful rhetoric any moment she can
If calling out Trump's idiocy on social media qualifies as being part of the political landscape, then I hope that I and many more hundreds of millions around the world can rely on your vote this November.

I really don't understand why you get so verklempt still about someone who's political career is over, can you not just leave her to run her pizza restaurant in peace?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 23, 2020, 05:50:06 PM
If calling out Trump's idiocy on social media qualifies as being part of the political landscape, then I hope that I and many more hundreds of millions around the world can rely on your vote this November.

I really don't understand why you get so verklempt still about someone who's political career is over, can you not just leave her to run her pizza restaurant in peace?
I don't understand what's causing this blind spot for you but I don't think I can overcome it with any number of examples
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 23, 2020, 05:53:52 PM
I don't understand what's causing this blind spot for you but I don't think I can overcome it with any number of examples
I'm not disputing you, I just haven't seen it and don't understand it. I don't have any particular feelings about her one way or the other.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 23, 2020, 08:45:44 PM


I don't have any particular feelings about her one way or the other.

If it was possible for opinions or lack thereof to be objectively wrong, this would be one
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 23, 2020, 08:49:07 PM

If it was possible for opinions or lack thereof to be objectively wrong, this would be one

It is not possible for a lack of opinion to be wrong unless you are an ideologue.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 23, 2020, 09:17:15 PM
It is not possible for a lack of opinion to be wrong unless you are an ideologue.
Wrong
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 23, 2020, 09:38:32 PM
I don't know who this is made for. The only people still interested in her are Republicans desperately clinging onto their last boogeyman, and I can't imagine that most of them will care to watch it.

lol, nah we haven't given two fucks about this demented old bat since she went strolling in the woods.

Bullet. Dodged.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 23, 2020, 09:58:46 PM


lol, nah we haven't given two fucks about this demented old bat since she was secretly tried and executed in 2017

FYP
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 26, 2020, 03:38:24 PM
This is totally about the constitution and not pandering to evangelicals

https://twitter.com/costareports/status/1287482272267018241?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 26, 2020, 05:00:22 PM
This is totally about the constitution and not pandering to evangelicals

https://twitter.com/costareports/status/1287482272267018241?s=19

Can I make a change to my list of States I'd like to see snapped out of existence?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 28, 2020, 01:30:30 PM
Buying strike fighters to "prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus" might the single most American thing ever.

(https://i.imgur.com/F80RWqJ.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on July 28, 2020, 02:20:02 PM
dcm supports this
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 28, 2020, 02:25:40 PM
dcm supports this
The F35 is a job creator
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 28, 2020, 05:59:53 PM
The F35 is a job creator

Sup
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 28, 2020, 06:39:39 PM
The F35 is a job creator

I'll repeat what I said before - spending money on building war excrement is better than just giving it directly to Wall St to do their fuckery because at least they're actually paying Americans to build excrement with American sourced materials, so it is creating some economic value. It's just nothing like as helpful as about a million other things that they could be paying Americans to build, because the finished product has no lasting economic value.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 28, 2020, 06:45:54 PM
I'll repeat what I said before - spending money on building war excrement is better than just giving it directly to Wall St to do their fuckery because at least they're actually paying Americans to build excrement with American sourced materials, so it is creating some economic value. It's just nothing like as helpful as about a million other things that they could be paying Americans to build, because the finished product has no lasting economic value.

Bridges and roads don’t fight the Rona
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 28, 2020, 07:08:40 PM
Bridges and roads don’t fight the Rona

That's true, and if those uppity negroes and their enabling moms with leaf blowers get any worse you're going to need all the F-35s you can get your hands on.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on July 28, 2020, 07:44:01 PM
I'll repeat what I said before - spending money on building war excrement is better than just giving it directly to Wall St to do their fuckery because at least they're actually paying Americans to build excrement with American sourced materials, so it is creating some economic value. It's just nothing like as helpful as about a million other things that they could be paying Americans to build, because the finished product has no lasting economic value.

Who the hell needs bridges? Or roads without potholes?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 28, 2020, 09:03:33 PM
Who the hell needs bridges? Or roads without potholes?

Bridges and roads are good examples, but they're simple ones. You know what else you could build with that money? Education programs. Apprenticeships. Scholarships. Accelerators.

"A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in."

You used to be the best at that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 28, 2020, 11:10:46 PM
I'll repeat what I said before - spending money on building war excrement is better than just giving it directly to Wall St to do their fuckery because at least they're actually paying Americans to build excrement with American sourced materials, so it is creating some economic value. It's just nothing like as helpful as about a million other things that they could be paying Americans to build, because the finished product has no lasting economic value.
Silver lining of the F35 is that it has never been used to kill anyone (on purpose)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on July 29, 2020, 05:45:17 PM
Bridges and roads are good examples, but they're simple ones. You know what else you could build with that money? Education programs. Apprenticeships. Scholarships. Accelerators.

"A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in."

You used to be the best at that.

Lol, Marxism at its finest!

Also, why would the US government want to invest in education at the risk that an entire segment of the population may actually begin to contemplate why they think/feel/believe what they do?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 29, 2020, 05:54:49 PM
But schools disproportionately benefit white people as their attrition rates are much higher than that of Latino and African Americans.

We should be defunding the schools to fight institutionalized racism, long supported by racist institutions like the public education system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 29, 2020, 06:18:00 PM
But schools disproportionately benefit white people as their attrition rates are much higher than that of Latino and African Americans.

We should be defunding the schools to fight institutionalized racism, long supported by racist institutions like the public education system.

Who mentioned schools?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 29, 2020, 06:20:06 PM
Bridges and roads are good examples, but they're simple ones. You know what else you could build with that money? Education programs. Apprenticeships. Scholarships. Accelerators.

"A society grows great when old men plant trees whose shade they know they shall never sit in."

You used to be the best at that.
Who mentioned schools?
But schools disproportionately benefit white people as their attrition rates are much higher than that of Latino and African Americans.

We should be defunding the schools to fight institutionalized racism, long supported by racist institutions like the public education system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 29, 2020, 06:46:50 PM


So.. you, then. You mentioned schools. Not me, and not Alio.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on July 29, 2020, 06:54:09 PM
But schools disproportionately benefit white people as their attrition rates are much higher than that of Latino and African Americans.

We should be defunding the schools to fight institutionalized racism, long supported by racist institutions like the public education system.

what
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 29, 2020, 07:52:22 PM
So.. you, then. You mentioned schools. Not me, and not Alio.


You mentioned adding funds to the public education system.

My argument was the public educational system further promotes racial inequality as schools are it's biggest component.

I'm not sure what kind of scholarships or educational programs you were implying that wouldn't be components of the failed public education system
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 29, 2020, 07:56:29 PM
what

The argument has been that police disproportionately negatively impact African Americans thereby perpetuating racial inequality and thus should be defunded.

I'm suggesting the exact same argument could be applied towards the public education system.

I would think due to sheer volume and cascade of consequences one could argue the impact of the education system is far greater.

Or as you would say

They ignorant
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 29, 2020, 08:19:44 PM
You mentioned adding funds to the public education system.

I did not. Stop arguing points you think have been made because they're a more convenient fit for your preconceptions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 29, 2020, 08:24:10 PM
I did not. Stop arguing points you think have been made because they're a more convenient fit for your preconceptions.

Then I misunderstood your point.

Could you please clarify for me what you meant by education programs and scholarships?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 29, 2020, 09:05:57 PM
Then I misunderstood your point.

Could you please clarify for me what you meant by education programs and scholarships?

I'm glad you asked. It covers a multitude of things. I don't think we're going to turn every six tooth redneck child into a Python whiz, but if I were in government (and not just the US, this applies equally pretty much any of the countries with which I have a passing political familiarity) I would look to make significant investments in a wide variety of programs to make educational programs more accessible for all, including but definitely not limited to:

- Massively subsidised training for vocations for the public good (e.g. nursing, teaching, social care)
- Beneficial term and forgivable loans for viable industry training (e.g. programming, IT, sales, finance)
- Government and industry backed training salaries to ensure that people do not have to forgo entering one of these training programs in order to cover basic living costs
- Salary subsidy for all apprenticeship programs along with a government operated skills and training marketplace, and preferential contractor/subcontractor programs to favour those organisations providing apprenticeships when bidding on public works contracts
- Childcare programs for all students needing it

I would also be taking active steps to stop the crazy cycle of can't get a job without a degree, can't get a degree without taking on massive debt, can't actually get a job in your chosen field even with a degree - I have particular thinking around the reprovisioning and repurposing of university education as well, but that's more applicable to countries like Canada and the US where basic human rights like healthcare are still provided as a public good.

Healthy and educated populations are productive. Basic economics tells us that keeping people sick and stupid is a core inefficiency. Any capitalist who doesn't want smarter people doesn't understand simple economic principles.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 29, 2020, 10:01:17 PM
It's an interesting idea, but would it not further promote racial economic inequality? I mean if you massively subsidize vocations for the public good, but a disproportionate amount of African Americans aren't graduating highschool, then wouldn't these programs be disproportionately benefiting all other racial groups?

It also brings up the issue that it is already incredibly difficult for social workers, teachers, and nurses to get jobs. With several years experience it's less challenging, but you're talking about oversaturating oversaturated markets. Ones in which many are already complaining about being underpaid.

I think unfortunately the biggest obstacle to anything so ambitious would be special interest groups on both side of the aisle.

I mean the right is basically inherently opposed to such things, and the left would essentially be creating competition for its own special interest groups. How do you think teachers unions would react to a proposal that would severely undercut their ability to get jobs and would further reduce their pay?

The can't get a job without a degree thing I think is a fantastic idea though. I just don't know how anyone could go about overturning that obstacle.

I can definitely respect how well thought out your ideas are though
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on July 29, 2020, 10:08:35 PM
I'm glad you asked. It covers a multitude of things. I don't think we're going to turn every six tooth redneck child into a Python whiz, but if I were in government (and not just the US, this applies equally pretty much any of the countries with which I have a passing political familiarity) I would look to make significant investments in a wide variety of programs to make educational programs more accessible for all, including but definitely not limited to:

- Massively subsidised training for vocations for the public good (e.g. nursing, teaching, social care)
- Beneficial term and forgivable loans for viable industry training (e.g. programming, IT, sales, finance)
- Government and industry backed training salaries to ensure that people do not have to forgo entering one of these training programs in order to cover basic living costs
- Salary subsidy for all apprenticeship programs along with a government operated skills and training marketplace, and preferential contractor/subcontractor programs to favour those organisations providing apprenticeships when bidding on public works contracts
- Childcare programs for all students needing it

I would also be taking active steps to stop the crazy cycle of can't get a job without a degree, can't get a degree without taking on massive debt, can't actually get a job in your chosen field even with a degree - I have particular thinking around the reprovisioning and repurposing of university education as well, but that's more applicable to countries like Canada and the US where basic human rights like healthcare are still provided as a public good.

Healthy and educated populations are productive. Basic economics tells us that keeping people sick and stupid is a core inefficiency. Any capitalist who doesn't want smarter people doesn't understand simple economic principles.

Healthy and educated is a threat to the fantastically wealthy and powerful--especially the powerful.

Inefficiencies only matter if there is more work than labor to fill it.

There are currently plans to unveil an economic stimulus package with a lower payment to the unemployed because business owners complained they couldn't fill jobs since people have been receiving more money on unemployment than businesses are willing to pay for labor. Profits over people should be part of the American National Anthem.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 29, 2020, 10:12:09 PM
Healthy and educated is a threat to the fantastically wealthy and powerful--especially the powerful.

Inefficiencies only matter if there is more work than labor to fill it.

There are currently plans to unveil an economic stimulus package with a lower payment to the unemployed because business owners complained they couldn't fill jobs since people have been receiving more money on unemployment than businesses are willing to pay for labor. Profits over people should be part of the American National Anthem.

What do you think happens if businesses go under?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on July 29, 2020, 10:22:22 PM
What do you think happens if businesses go under?
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200730/5a8af84e0ccd833da193539b5f5814b7.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on July 29, 2020, 10:24:29 PM
What do you think happens if businesses go under?

Other businesses take their place? I thought Americans prided themselves on filling gaps with entrepreneurial innovation?

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with your question. Am I supposed to say "Well, in order to maintain the precious economy, businesses have to survive, and for businesses to survive, they have to maximize profits, even if that means paying lower wages"?

If that's the nonsense you're looking for, you're talking to the wrong person.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 29, 2020, 10:46:27 PM
Other businesses take their place? I thought Americans prided themselves on filling gaps with entrepreneurial innovation?

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make with your question. Am I supposed to say "Well, in order to maintain the precious economy, businesses have to survive, and for businesses to survive, they have to maximize profits, even if that means paying lower wages"?

If that's the nonsense you're looking for, you're talking to the wrong person.

Yeah during good times, not at the beginning of potentially a recession/depression depending on how this plays out.

And maybe you have a skewed vision of businesses with this talk of maximizing profits.

Your average business isn't Microsoft or Amazon and some other multi billion dollar corporations worried about getting new private jets. It's tiny small businesses all over the country doing everything they can to survive. I mean this pandemic hasn't even peaked yet and look what has happened to restaurants. Imagine if this continues for another 8 months.

And if that not enough for you think of it from a humanitarian perspective. If only select people are going to be supported from the government during these times. Do you think that should be determined based on need? As in elderly, immunosuppresed, vulnerable, taking care of sick/elderly etc?

Or should it be determined simply by opportunistic people wanting to take advantage of the government during a crisis deciding they should be entitled to government money while others who actually need it are out working everyday?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 29, 2020, 10:49:33 PM
Here’s a novel approach for DCM: STFU.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 29, 2020, 11:00:02 PM
Here’s a novel approach for DCM: STFU.

(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn%3AANd9GcTikK2GizPmyRMBUxqSq4lfb7FcrvHFZqPFSw&usqp=CAU)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 30, 2020, 07:37:49 AM
I mean it's pretty clear dcm is just whatabouting police violence by trying to muddy the waters with the very different issues of education and previously health.

So I don't know why anyone is effortposting in response.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 30, 2020, 08:55:47 AM
I mean it's pretty clear dcm is just whatabouting police violence by trying to muddy the waters with the very different issues of education and previously health.

So I don't know why anyone is effortposting in response.

dcm ‘giant block of excrement that nobody wants to read‘ response incoming
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 30, 2020, 11:30:46 AM
https://twitter.com/JSCCounterPunch/status/1288872491566288896?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 30, 2020, 01:19:59 PM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200730/8c3de41220d16a22fdf5b524a11de92f.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on July 30, 2020, 01:20:24 PM
https://twitter.com/JSCCounterPunch/status/1288872491566288896?s=19

I mean, it's true to an extent. There was a lot of division within the Civil Rights movement in the 60s. John Lewis was one of the first members of the Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, and was definitely part of the faction that believed strongly in the dogma of nonviolence. In 66, he lost an election for head of the SNCC to Stokely Carmichael, who was advocating for more a militaristic focus and popularized the phrase 'black power'. John Lewis was both criticized and praised within the movement at the time for being conciliatory and non-combative.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 30, 2020, 01:34:37 PM
Of course being conciliatory and noncombative are the two most desirable qualities in an activist if you're a Clinton.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 30, 2020, 01:50:21 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200730/8c3de41220d16a22fdf5b524a11de92f.jpg)

Nick Cordero, Adam Schlesinger and & Roy will all be relieved to hear that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on July 30, 2020, 02:00:25 PM
Nick Cordero, Adam Schlesinger and & Roy will all be relieved to hear that.

Not real! HOAX. STFU Marxist!!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on July 30, 2020, 02:02:05 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200730/8c3de41220d16a22fdf5b524a11de92f.jpg)
Angela Stanton-King is an American author, television personality and motivational speaker based in Atlanta, Georgia. She spent two years in prison for conspiracy and was later pardoned by President Donald Trump.

Can someone help me stop getting mad at the idiots in this world?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 30, 2020, 02:07:50 PM
Angela Stanton-King is an American author, television personality and motivational speaker based in Atlanta, Georgia. She spent two years in prison for conspiracy and was later pardoned by President Donald Trump.

Can someone help me stop getting mad at the idiots in this world?
Alcohol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 04, 2020, 11:19:02 PM
Letting the olds on to Facebook was a mistake.

https://twitter.com/FacebooksTop10/status/1290730301434388480?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 05, 2020, 09:34:41 AM
Letting the olds on to Facebook was a mistake.

https://twitter.com/FacebooksTop10/status/1290730301434388480?s=19

Facebook is now officially an app for the olds. I was pretty surprised when my Pizzas lil bro told me this 3-4 years ago. He said no one his age (20) uses facebook and that its literally viewed by his peer group as social media for old people. I slightly disagreed with him that day, but now I’ve come around to that realization a few years later.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 05, 2020, 09:36:58 AM
Facebook is now officially an app for the olds. I was pretty surprised when my Pizzas lil bro told me this 3-4 years ago. He said no one his age (20) uses facebook and that its literally viewed by his peer group as social media for old people. I slightly disagreed with him that day, but now I’ve come around to that realization a few years later.

I'm old and it's the only social media app I use. I don't really touch politics on there though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 07, 2020, 07:08:22 PM
The more I see of Facebook the more I think it’s an app for people that shouldn’t be allowed to access the internet
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on August 08, 2020, 03:12:30 AM
I stopped going on Facebook a year or two ago, other than occasionally using the messenger app. I need to curate my feed a lot more if I go on there, just to see family and close friends, but I'm too lazy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 08, 2020, 04:52:53 AM
The odd thing is there's no direct successor to Facebook like it was to MySpace.

Now it's just a mishmosh of Twitter snapchat tiktok and Instagram.

I'm surprised but I think Instagram has replaced Facebook more than anything
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on August 08, 2020, 06:29:08 AM
(https://i.redd.it/ngncx8euaof51.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 08, 2020, 05:24:00 PM
I didn't know Nancy Pelosi was 80 years old.  I thought low 70s.  Makes her old funbags even more age-defying.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 08, 2020, 08:42:22 PM
https://juicygif.com/m/public/Gif/hypnotic-endless-swining-411120p.html/(mode)/search/(keyword)/swinging-funbags
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 09, 2020, 12:26:34 AM
https://juicygif.com/m/public/Gif/hypnotic-endless-swining-411120p.html/(mode)/search/(keyword)/swinging-funbags
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200809/2322f882e6be8202ccc2f567c9d67825.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 10, 2020, 10:24:11 PM
https://twitter.com/realhottiepants/status/1292995343651667969?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 11, 2020, 08:17:02 AM
https://twitter.com/realhottiepants/status/1292995343651667969?s=19

Is her skin painted on?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 11, 2020, 08:18:20 AM
She just got done with a titty swinging session with Schumer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 11, 2020, 09:25:25 AM
Is her skin painted on?
Gotta cover the scales
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 11, 2020, 09:31:44 AM
Gotta cover the scales

...you cut me off to my next joke
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 11, 2020, 09:32:15 AM
*looks up Harry Potter spells*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on August 11, 2020, 10:37:32 AM
why do people think nancy pelosi is hot

she has a hot name but is absolutely abhorrent

you know that hoo-ha is garbage
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 11, 2020, 10:39:55 AM


why do people think nancy pelosi is hot

Does anyone actually think that?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 11, 2020, 11:01:58 AM

Does anyone actually think that?

She's 80.  No.  I think someone said she had pretty good jugs for an old lady. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 11, 2020, 11:02:17 AM
why do people think nancy pelosi is hot

she has a hot name but is absolutely abhorrent

you know that hoo-ha is garbage

Nancy Gaga
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 11, 2020, 12:36:09 PM
why do people think nancy pelosi is hot

she has a hot name but is absolutely abhorrent

you know that hoo-ha is garbage

Prone. Bone.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 11, 2020, 12:40:32 PM
Prone. Bone.
Pelosi and Feinstein scissoring

It's in your head now
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 11, 2020, 12:41:55 PM
Pelosi and Feinstein scissoring

It's in your head now
Better than Barney Frank tossing salad with McConnell.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 11, 2020, 12:42:41 PM
She's 80.  No.  I think someone said she had pretty good jugs for an old lady. 

That was me and I’ll wear it like a badge of honor

Those chest cannons are national monuments
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 11, 2020, 12:49:18 PM
That was me and I’ll wear it like a badge of honor

Those chest cannons are national monuments
You just know they are the old silicon hooters from the 80's.  You could probably caulk a bathtub with the stuff in there.  Built for handling, not health.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 11, 2020, 12:59:06 PM
Better than Barney Frank tossing salad with McConnell.
Did you see the Lindsey Graham story? With the "ladybugs"?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 13, 2020, 05:23:57 AM
https://twitter.com/jdelreal/status/1293694576855842816?s=21

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pvhXzfNbyxA
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 13, 2020, 10:12:26 AM
https://twitter.com/jdelreal/status/1293694576855842816?s=21

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=pvhXzfNbyxA
That story actually infuriated me, freak those nerds.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 13, 2020, 10:13:33 AM
Bonus reason people need to STFU about Russia

https://twitter.com/cestlavieinus/status/1293733175869550592?s=19

Because obviously rUsSiA is meddling in Massachusetts congressional primaries
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 15, 2020, 04:46:05 PM
Healthy and normal segment of the population

https://www.thedailybeast.com/qanon-promotes-pedo-ring-conspiracy-theories-now-theyre-stealing-kids
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 16, 2020, 05:19:12 PM
(https://i.redd.it/b3boty1tdah51.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 19, 2020, 07:53:12 AM
Quote
Flight logs show Clinton took at least 26 flights on Epstein's planes

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/lisettevoytko/2020/08/18/photos-allegedly-show-bill-clinton-receiving-massage-from-jeffrey-epstein-accuser/amp/

But what about Woody Johnson doe?!

(and yes this particular woman says Clinton was a gentleman and accuses of him no wron doing)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 19, 2020, 07:57:02 AM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.forbes.com/sites/lisettevoytko/2020/08/18/photos-allegedly-show-bill-clinton-receiving-massage-from-jeffrey-epstein-accuser/amp/

But what about Woody Johnson doe?!

I think you are vastly over-estimating how upset anyone on this board would be if Bill Clinton went down for this.

They can also both be guilty of separate things without detracting from one another’s culpability.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 19, 2020, 08:04:26 AM


I think you are vastly over-estimating how upset anyone on this board would be if Bill Clinton went down for this.

Launch him into the sun.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 19, 2020, 08:34:13 AM

Launch him into the sun.

I'm down.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 19, 2020, 09:42:47 AM

Launch him into the sun.
He'd manage to bang a chick there.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 28, 2020, 12:07:35 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/28/house-democrats-announce-contempt-proceedings-against-mike-pompeo.html

More excrement that won't go anywhere.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 28, 2020, 01:05:14 PM
He'd manage to assault a minor there.
FTFY
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 28, 2020, 07:20:22 PM
The best part of Das Kapital is the 9 chapters about trans people

https://twitter.com/RealCandaceO/status/1299374396864368641?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 28, 2020, 08:19:33 PM
The best part of Das Kapital is the 9 chapters about trans people

https://twitter.com/RealCandaceO/status/1299374396864368641?s=19

The tit for tat answer to this is Jonathan Yaniv asserting he actually can/does menstrate, but I'm not unleashed that freaking monster on this board. Cando is at least easy on the eyes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 28, 2020, 08:33:41 PM
The tit for tat answer to this is Jonathan Yaniv asserting he actually can/does menstrate, but I'm not unleashed that freaking monster on this board. Cando is at least easy on the eyes.
mj, I want you to know that I will always defend your right to PMT.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 28, 2020, 08:47:54 PM
The tit for tat answer to this is Jonathan Yaniv asserting he actually can/does menstrate, but I'm not unleashed that freaking monster on this board. Cando is at least easy on the eyes.
A quick search reveals this person is neither a marxist nor a trans activist and apparently only exists to create RW clickbait
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 28, 2020, 11:15:59 PM
mj, I want you to know that I will always defend your right to PMT.

Thank you,  a little ibuprofen and I'll be good to go.


A quick search reveals this person is neither a marxist nor a trans activist and apparently only exists to create RW clickbait

He absolutely did fashion himself and was being accepted as a trans activist before being outed as a pedo with serious issues with women (hence the intentional misgendering).

He has asserted he can biologically menstrate.

If that's a bad example, this apparently isn't an uncommon thing with militant trans people on twitter who assert JK Rowling (lol) is the second coming of Satan.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 29, 2020, 08:49:16 AM


He absolutely did fashion himself and was being accepted as a trans activist before being outed as a pedo with serious issues with women (hence the intentional misgendering).

He has asserted he can biologically menstrate.

If that's a bad example, this apparently isn't an uncommon thing with militant trans people on twitter who assert JK Rowling (lol) is the second coming of Satan.

Mike Pence actually believes in Satan (lol)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 29, 2020, 01:31:51 PM
Thank you,  a little ibuprofen and I'll be good to go.


He absolutely did fashion himself and was being accepted as a trans activist before being outed as a pedo with serious issues with women (hence the intentional misgendering).

He has asserted he can biologically menstrate.

If that's a bad example, this apparently isn't an uncommon thing with militant trans people on twitter who assert JK Rowling (lol) is the second coming of Satan.



Is JK Rowling good or bad, the reptilian party needs to pick a position and stick to it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 29, 2020, 03:53:48 PM

Mike Pence actually believes in Satan (lol)

no religion too?!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 29, 2020, 07:28:24 PM
Is JK Rowling good or bad, the reptilian party needs to pick a position and stick to it
She's bad for teaching children witchcraft but she's good for bashing trans people
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 29, 2020, 08:03:27 PM
no religion too?!

  (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7c/John_Lennon_Imagine_1971.jpg/384px-John_Lennon_Imagine_1971.jpg)

.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 01, 2020, 11:38:31 AM
LMAO

https://twitter.com/ChuckCallesto/status/1300793741477851138?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 01, 2020, 11:47:33 AM
LMAO

https://twitter.com/ChuckCallesto/status/1300793741477851138?s=19

Can't handle the Randall!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 02, 2020, 08:16:38 AM
https://twitter.com/ktvu/status/1300919385381507072?s=21

Send this bitch and her floppy titties to the moon
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 02, 2020, 08:17:19 AM
Quote
I believe her becuase she was probably drunk at the time or didnt think it was wrong for a liberal to break the rules

lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 02, 2020, 08:21:20 AM
https://twitter.com/ktvu/status/1300919385381507072?s=21

Send this bitch and her floppy titties to the moon

How dare you besmirch her melons!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 02, 2020, 10:40:09 AM
Eagerly awaiting the takes from Carlson and Ingraham on this one.

https://twitter.com/zellieimani/status/1300988787401658369?s=19 (https://twitter.com/zellieimani/status/1300988787401658369?s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 02, 2020, 11:00:09 AM
Eagerly awaiting the takes from Carlson and Ingraham on this one.

https://twitter.com/zellieimani/status/1300988787401658369?s=19 (https://twitter.com/zellieimani/status/1300988787401658369?s=19)

I'm sure that the Blue Lives Matter evangelists on Facebook will be out in their massed forces to decry this guy any minute now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 02, 2020, 11:12:49 AM
https://twitter.com/HKrassenstein/status/1301158375200260103?s=19 (https://twitter.com/HKrassenstein/status/1301158375200260103?s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 02, 2020, 11:15:35 AM
https://twitter.com/HKrassenstein/status/1301158375200260103?s=19 (https://twitter.com/HKrassenstein/status/1301158375200260103?s=19)

And now he's dead. Trump playing 4D chess by using his staff to infect foreign dictators with western STDs.

/trumpanzee
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 02, 2020, 02:04:31 PM
And now he's dead. Trump playing 4D chess by using his staff to infect foreign dictators with western STDs.

/trumpanzee
Fake news
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 02, 2020, 07:59:06 PM
https://twitter.com/calebjhull/status/1301254799984394242?s=21

It was RUSSIA
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 09, 2020, 08:33:18 PM
Millions have lost their jobs, health insurance, and possibly soon, their homes. The response:

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/09/08/asia/xi-jinping-title-us-bill-intl-dst-hnk/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 09, 2020, 09:26:07 PM
Millions have lost their jobs, health insurance, and possibly soon, their homes. The response:

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2020/09/08/asia/xi-jinping-title-us-bill-intl-dst-hnk/index.html

No but Joe Biden bad
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 09, 2020, 09:26:39 PM
No but Joe Biden bad
Yes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on September 10, 2020, 07:42:32 AM
tucker carlson is blaming lindsay graham for trump interviewing with woodward

which is kind of funny timing since graham is +/-3 against harrison in sc to keep his seat. almost like its meant to help graham against the attacks saying hes trumps fluffer
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 11, 2020, 09:12:22 AM
Cool

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1294021275254427655?s=21 (https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1294021275254427655?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 11, 2020, 10:52:30 AM
Cool

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1294021275254427655?s=21 (https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1294021275254427655?s=21)

Can't believe the lady who did this is unhinged from reality

https://twitter.com/daveyalba/status/1301914505656578049?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 11, 2020, 11:00:56 AM
Cool

https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1294021275254427655?s=21 (https://twitter.com/jaketapper/status/1294021275254427655?s=21)

Jake Tapper apologize for trying to meddle in an election yet?

Can't believe the lady who did this is unhinged from reality

https://twitter.com/daveyalba/status/1301914505656578049?s=19

If anyone has a firm grasp on reality, its Rashida Tlaib.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mV0Xg0xR1Ps
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 11, 2020, 11:09:46 AM
Rashida is good actually
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 14, 2020, 04:04:13 PM
WTF

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/like-an-experimental-concentration-camp-whistleblower-complaint-alleges-mass-hysterectomies-at-ice-detention-center/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 14, 2020, 04:27:06 PM
WTF

https://lawandcrime.com/high-profile/like-an-experimental-concentration-camp-whistleblower-complaint-alleges-mass-hysterectomies-at-ice-detention-center/

Nothing about this isn’t horrifying.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on September 14, 2020, 06:02:11 PM
well maybe they shouldnt have crossed an imaginary line!11!1212
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 14, 2020, 06:15:55 PM
Quote from: Badger
Rashida is good actually

  I've seen better head on cattle - she's the odd in the squad - she's


                   ^ Out ^                                        ^  Of  ^                               ^  The  ^                               v  Money  v
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e8/9H1A8460_%2845265959355%29_%28cropped%29.jpg/240px-9H1A8460_%2845265959355%29_%28cropped%29.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/64/Ilhan_Omar%2C_official_portrait%2C_116th_Congress.jpg/192px-Ilhan_Omar%2C_official_portrait%2C_116th_Congress.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b9/Ayanna_Pressley_Portrait.jpg/192px-Ayanna_Pressley_Portrait.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Rashida_Tlaib%2C_official_portrait%2C_116th_Congress.jpg/192px-Rashida_Tlaib%2C_official_portrait%2C_116th_Congress.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 14, 2020, 07:19:30 PM
You've been working on this post for a while and I have to say, it wasn't worth the time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 15, 2020, 12:58:22 AM
 
 edit: CatoTheAnger  CatoTheAdult

  (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Stopwatch_A.jpg/166px-Stopwatch_A.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 15, 2020, 01:00:03 PM
Another tard on the cuties crusade

https://www.forbes.com/sites/rachelsandler/2020/09/12/ted-cruz-falsely-claims-netflixs-cuties-shows-child-nudity-in-call-for-doj-probe/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 16, 2020, 09:52:48 AM
http://labor411.org/411-blog/gop-senator-who-walked-out-to-stop-climate-vote-loses-house-to-wildfire

Probably should have swept up his leaves or something.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 18, 2020, 10:25:26 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/ZxBSn64.png)

Her statement:

Quote
So you’re mad. I get it. I promise you: I get it. You feel betrayed. You may even be wondering how the party that you so believed in could do something like this. But, odds are, you’re blaming me. Most people are probably angry at me, and blaming me for all this. That’s silly. I was always upfront about who I am. The good man in Rindge who looked into me found out everything he needed to know with a simple Google search. There it was, plain as day:

Anarchist. Shemale. Tranny. Libertarian. “freak the police.” Free Talk Live. Bitcoin. Reformed Satanic Church. Black Lives Matter …

I went into it expecting that I would lose the primary to a write-in candidate, because I didn’t think that so many voters were just… completely and totally oblivious about who they are voting for.

Because the fact is that you didn’t bother. You trusted the system. You trusted the establishment. You trusted the party. You felt safe. You were sure that there must be some mechanisms in place to prevent from occurring exactly what just occurred. Your anger is misplaced if you direct it at me…

Really, whose fault is all this? You don’t know anything about the people you’re voting for. You’re just blindly voting for them because you trust in the party, you trust in the system. Well, the party is broken, and the system is broken. It’s all broken.

More than 4,000 people went into the voting booth on September 8 this week, and they all filled in the circle by my name despite knowing absolutely nothing about the person they were nominating to the most powerful law enforcement position in the county. That’s a level of recklessness of which any decent human being should be ashamed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Laxin on September 18, 2020, 10:48:11 AM
^ That is absolutely amazing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 18, 2020, 10:50:50 AM
Old news

http://www.thejetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,4933.msg384237.html#msg384237

You are supposed to comb through every thread 12 times before posting recycled content.  I'm offended.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 18, 2020, 06:37:17 PM
RBG DED
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 18, 2020, 06:43:56 PM
RBG DED

freak
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on September 18, 2020, 07:05:23 PM
RBG DED

Oh freak jesus no
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 18, 2020, 07:13:25 PM
Republican Senate will probably have a new guy in there by Monday
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 18, 2020, 07:19:03 PM
Romney and Murkowski won't vote for anyone before the election, but they still need another Republican to bail.  All they need is a simple majority and they have 53 in the senate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 18, 2020, 07:36:17 PM
Romney and Murkowski won't vote for anyone before the election, but they still need another Republican to bail.  All they need is a simple majority and they have 53 in the senate.
They only need 50 with Pence as tiebreaker
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 18, 2020, 07:47:29 PM
They only need 50 with Pence as tiebreaker
Gase'd?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 18, 2020, 08:06:45 PM
Amy Coney Barrett incoming
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on September 18, 2020, 08:10:05 PM
https://twitter.com/pdmcleod/status/1307119938184908801?s=19

How not unexpected. What a piece of excrement

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 18, 2020, 08:13:13 PM
I think it's going to be very close.  I'll never be surprised by anyone going against their word, but I bet 3 or 4 Rebulican senators won't do it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on September 18, 2020, 08:13:25 PM
https://twitter.com/EdMarkey/status/1307122232850870274?s=19

I'd be A-OK with that.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on September 18, 2020, 08:15:27 PM
McConnells statement, in all its scumbaggery(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200919/dcc5160e56806aa16be275270327306b.jpg)

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 18, 2020, 08:16:36 PM
..(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200919/195969a0d6b8dde5ef46bd57dc5c00e8.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on September 18, 2020, 08:19:50 PM
How not unexpected. What a piece of excrement

I don't know why but I'm actually genuinely surprised. I guess I expected too much.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on September 18, 2020, 08:20:27 PM
https://twitter.com/JimDabakis/status/1307120855454044160?s=19

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on September 18, 2020, 08:21:59 PM
This could hurt bigtime, if they jam someone in now there's no way the Dems dont try and expand the court.

Not to mention maybe some Repubs will acknowledge the hipocracy? Nahh

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 18, 2020, 08:22:38 PM
It would be funny if they go to vote thinking  they have 50 votes and one of them gives the McCain last minute thumbs down to freak it up for them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 18, 2020, 08:37:25 PM
I'd care about the obvious hypocrisy if the other side wasn't literally threatening to pack the supreme court and abolish the filibuster.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on September 18, 2020, 08:39:17 PM
"If the other side wasn't threatening to do what my side is trying to do, I'd be mad"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 18, 2020, 08:40:06 PM
"If the other side wasn't threatening to do what my side is trying to do, I'd be mad"

Except no one is threatening the filibuster or to pack the supreme court, but ok.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on September 18, 2020, 08:40:44 PM
This isn't trying to pack the court? Ok.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 18, 2020, 08:40:54 PM
Except not one republican is threatening the filibuster or to pack the supreme court, but ok.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on September 18, 2020, 08:41:53 PM
McConnells statement, in all its scumbaggery(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200919/dcc5160e56806aa16be275270327306b.jpg)

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk



You seem to have missed that
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 18, 2020, 08:53:41 PM
Claire McCaskill, professional wrong person

https://twitter.com/BillCorbett/status/1307134833957707776?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 18, 2020, 08:53:50 PM
https://twitter.com/alexandrawlee/status/1307107479512330240?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 18, 2020, 08:56:32 PM
https://twitter.com/alexandrawlee/status/1307107479512330240?s=21

Stop stealing from my TL
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 18, 2020, 08:57:28 PM
I'd care about the obvious hypocrisy if the other side wasn't literally threatening to pack the supreme court and abolish the filibuster.

No you wouldn't
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 18, 2020, 08:58:14 PM
It would be funny if they go to vote thinking  they have 50 votes and one of them gives the McCain last minute thumbs down to freak it up for them.

But in real life 52 Republicans plus Joe Manchin will vote to confirm their nominee
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 18, 2020, 09:40:50 PM
Stop stealing from my TL

Q https://twitter.com/countcaleb/status/1307107478686126082?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on September 18, 2020, 09:46:10 PM
romney is actually not opposed apparently, sweet
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 19, 2020, 09:42:23 AM
This isn't trying to pack the court? Ok.

Lol, ok, except no this isn't trying to pack the court, and I'm positive you have absolutely no idea what that means. 

Acting upon an elected majority is acting upon an elected majority. Packing the court is not getting your way, and when you finally get a majority, expand the supreme court to better reflect the ideology you want it to, the slippery slope being of course what's to stop republicans when the conditions are in place to do the very same thing. And so it goes. Real easy way to break the foundation of the judicial branch because you lost a couple elections running horrible candidates.

No you wouldn't

Lol, you right. It does make it a lot easier though.

But in real life 52 Republicans plus Joe Manchin will vote to confirm their nominee

lol, you right.

romney is actually not opposed apparently, sweet

Even the sun shines on a dogs derriere every once in a while.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 19, 2020, 10:01:50 AM
https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein/status/1307194918117478401?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 19, 2020, 10:28:12 AM
https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein/status/1307194918117478401?s=19

Reminds me of Macho Man saving us from the rapture.

(https://i.imgur.com/aPuz5.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 19, 2020, 10:31:35 AM
I hate these people so much(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200919/fce7e1db7fb007814a2b9fb5bc978114.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 19, 2020, 11:21:53 AM
I hate these people so much

I agree, they forgot to mention Jill Stein.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on September 19, 2020, 11:50:49 AM
Reminds me of Macho Man saving us from the rapture.

(https://i.imgur.com/aPuz5.jpg)

Fun Fact:  Macho Man and I share a birthday
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 19, 2020, 12:28:01 PM
I hate these people so much(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200919/fce7e1db7fb007814a2b9fb5bc978114.jpg)

Hey it's the same scare tactic that's been used since 1996!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 20, 2020, 08:21:10 AM
https://twitter.com/chuckgrassley/status/1307421592411156482?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 20, 2020, 08:39:01 AM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200920/b253ab1890129f343b0bf4cd9ea9de8a.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 20, 2020, 08:41:17 AM
I agree, they forgot to mention Jill Stein.

And pUtIn
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 20, 2020, 08:57:58 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200920/b253ab1890129f343b0bf4cd9ea9de8a.jpg)

End scene.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 20, 2020, 09:12:03 AM

  https://genesiustimes.com/oped-i-was-raped-by-whoever-trump-picks-to-replace-ginsburg-on-the-supreme-court/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 20, 2020, 01:08:16 PM

  Nancy funbags to the rescue

  https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/pelosi-won-t-rule-out-new-impeachment-delay-scotus-vote-n1240568
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 22, 2020, 08:24:43 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/08/11/mcconnell-kentucky-coronavirus-aid/

Watch them line up again to vote for the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on September 22, 2020, 08:11:54 PM
https://apnews.com/b5ddd0854037e9687e952cd79e1526df (https://apnews.com/b5ddd0854037e9687e952cd79e1526df)

moar please
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 23, 2020, 10:37:51 AM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20200923/372f8278ea3276f8c03665c072f5595a.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 23, 2020, 11:36:07 AM
lmaoooo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 23, 2020, 12:45:02 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2020/08/11/mcconnell-kentucky-coronavirus-aid/

Watch them line up again to vote for the Leopards Eating People's Faces Party.

Good thing the other 49 states dumped millions into a guaranteed loser in McGrath
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 23, 2020, 03:38:11 PM
Redirecting the SCOTUS discussion in here since little of it has to do with Trump

"Lying is ok because I'm not accountable to my own words" is not a stirring defense

It's always been about doing it because they could, the election year talking point was bullshit, and Dems need to stop appealing to some invisible referee. Failure to obstruct the pick, or unwillingness to expand the court in 2021 is unacceptable. As we've established, precedent is worthless, the only thing that matters is exercising what power you have to accomplish your goals.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 23, 2020, 03:43:10 PM
Redirecting the SCOTUS discussion in here since little of it has to do with Trump

"Lying is ok because I'm not accountable to my own words" is not a stirring defense

It's always been about doing it because they could, the election year talking point was bullshit, and Dems need to stop appealing to some invisible referee. Failure to obstruct the pick, or unwillingness to expand the court in 2021 is unacceptable. As we've established, precedent is worthless, the only thing that matters is exercising what power you have to accomplish your goals.

Agree with all of this. Do you think the Dems would push it through if the shoe was on the other foot? Same exact situation dating back to 2016 with roles reversed
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 23, 2020, 05:16:12 PM
Redirecting the SCOTUS discussion in here since little of it has to do with Trump

"Lying is ok because I'm not accountable to my own words" is not a stirring defense

It's always been about doing it because they could, the election year talking point was bullshit, and Dems need to stop appealing to some invisible referee. Failure to obstruct the pick, or unwillingness to expand the court in 2021 is unacceptable. As we've established, precedent is worthless, the only thing that matters is exercising what power you have to accomplish your goals.

Well fortunately they can't pass a freaking CR to save the gov't right now. Maybe the shutdown will act as a hinderance.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 23, 2020, 05:54:27 PM
Well fortunately they can't pass a freaking CR to save the gov't right now. Maybe the shutdown will act as a hinderance.
Confirming a new justice before passing a 2021 budget would be a perfect cherry on the excrement sundae
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 23, 2020, 10:13:17 PM
It's always been about doing it because they could, the election year talking point was bullshit, and Dems need to stop appealing to some invisible referee. Failure to obstruct the pick, or unwillingness to expand the court in 2021 is unacceptable. As we've established, precedent is worthless, the only thing that matters is exercising what power you have to accomplish your goals.

The difference being that the GOP senate utilized power that is directly in line with the Constitution whereas obstructing the pick and especially the odious notion of packing the court are not.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on September 23, 2020, 10:41:03 PM
The difference being that the GOP senate utilized power that is directly in line with the Constitution whereas obstructing the pick and especially the odious notion of packing the court are not.

"Article III of the Constitution, which establishes the Judicial Branch, leaves Congress significant discretion to determine the shape and structure of the federal judiciary. Even the number of Supreme Court Justices is left to Congress — at times there have been as few as six, while the current number (nine, with one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices) has only been in place since 1869. "

- whitehouse.gov

Adding seats is directly in line with the Constitution
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 24, 2020, 10:11:30 PM
JE's favorite fantasy writer

https://twitter.com/VK_HM/status/1309296645667016705?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 25, 2020, 04:49:10 AM
"Article III of the Constitution, which establishes the Judicial Branch, leaves Congress significant discretion to determine the shape and structure of the federal judiciary. Even the number of Supreme Court Justices is left to Congress — at times there have been as few as six, while the current number (nine, with one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices) has only been in place since 1869. "

- whitehouse.gov

Adding seats is directly in line with the Constitution

Ok...

Putting aside the constitutionality of overriding hundreds of years of judicial independence that is expressly packing the Court with those of a specific ideology so that you can get what you want in a move that DIRECTLY violates the notion of an independent judicial branch.

The fact that so many would operate with such short-sightedness after a lesson clearly wasn't learned upon Harry Reid invoking the nuclear option is unreal. You guys legitimately just think that the next time Democrats gain power will be the last and they'll just be able to impose one-party rule.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on September 25, 2020, 06:57:10 AM
"Article III of the Constitution, which establishes the Judicial Branch, leaves Congress significant discretion to determine the shape and structure of the federal judiciary. Even the number of Supreme Court Justices is left to Congress — at times there have been as few as six, while the current number (nine, with one Chief Justice and eight Associate Justices) has only been in place since 1869. "

- whitehouse.gov

Adding seats is directly in line with the Constitution
There were also 8 justices for over a year because McConnell wanted more power. If the GOP were so concerned about making sure all 9 seats were filled, they would have heard out Garland.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 25, 2020, 07:26:25 AM
Packing the court is not unconstitutional and falls within the powers of the Senate.

Packing the court is a bad idea.

If this election is to be a reformation on partisan politics, both sides need to agree to serious reforms of Senate procedure. McConnell and Schumer would both definitely stand in the way of that being possible. So, in fact, would a majority of the current serving members of the Senate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on September 25, 2020, 07:55:05 AM
Ok...

Putting aside the constitutionality of overriding hundreds of years of judicial independence that is expressly packing the Court with those of a specific ideology so that you can get what you want in a move that DIRECTLY violates the notion of an independent judicial branch.

The fact that so many would operate with such short-sightedness after a lesson clearly wasn't learned upon Harry Reid invoking the nuclear option is unreal. You guys legitimately just think that the next time Democrats gain power will be the last and they'll just be able to impose one-party rule.

TLDR
"ya but still..."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 25, 2020, 08:08:21 AM
There were also 8 justices for over a year because McConnell wanted more power. If the GOP were so concerned about making sure all 9 seats were filled, they would have heard out Garland.

As I've repeatedly said, not having a confirmation hearing was a mistake, and under no circumstances should a majority Republican senate have ever confirmed Merrick Garland.

Packing the court is a bad idea.

If this election is to be a reformation on partisan politics, both sides need to agree to serious reforms of Senate procedure. McConnell and Schumer would both definitely stand in the way of that being possible. So, in fact, would a majority of the current serving members of the Senate.


Love it!

Agree with all of this, but as long as term limits are a pipe dream so is anyone acting out of anything but partisan or self interest.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 25, 2020, 08:18:21 AM
Term limits in both the Senate and the House need to happen. No one should be in the Senate for 35 years.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on September 25, 2020, 08:19:36 AM
Term limits in both the Senate and the House need to happen. No one should be in the Senate for 35 years.

35 year senate pension sounds pretty good
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 25, 2020, 08:38:32 AM
Term limits in both the Senate and the House need to happen. No one should be in the Senate for 35 years.

I see there's a House bill to place term limits on Supreme Court judges.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 25, 2020, 09:27:41 AM
Term limits in both the Senate and the House need to happen. No one should be in the Senate for 35 years.

Yeah, but the people voting on it are the ones who benefit.  It will require a massive uproar.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 25, 2020, 06:51:48 PM
Packing the court is not unconstitutional and falls within the powers of the Senate.

Packing the court is a bad idea.

If this election is to be a reformation on partisan politics, both sides need to agree to serious reforms of Senate procedure. McConnell and Schumer would both definitely stand in the way of that being possible. So, in fact, would a majority of the current serving members of the Senate.

  +1


Term limits in both the Senate and the House need to happen. No one should be in the Senate for 35 years.
  +2. 

In my neck of the woods we've had Elliot Engel (D-L) and Nita Lowey (D-L) in the House for 30+ years.  Only this year was Elliot defeated in the primary and only because Engel was/went AWOL during the opening months of the rona which his opponent's TV ads (effectively) hammered away at him regarding.

-
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 27, 2020, 02:17:22 PM
Packing the court is not unconstitutional and falls within the powers of the Senate.

Packing the court is a bad idea.

If this election is to be a reformation on partisan politics, both sides need to agree to serious reforms of Senate procedure. McConnell and Schumer would both definitely stand in the way of that being possible. So, in fact, would a majority of the current serving members of the Senate.

Packing the court is good because it delegitimizes one of the least democratic levers of power in the US.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 27, 2020, 02:27:39 PM
Term limits in both the Senate and the House need to happen. No one should be in the Senate for 35 years.

Term limits aren't inherently good

In NYC local pols jump into races that aren't at all appropriate for them because they've been term limited out of their old role. At the federal level it would just turn congress into even more of a future lobbyist generator with everyone trying to secure a cushy landing at a special interest entity after they use up their terms.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on September 27, 2020, 02:42:50 PM
Putting aside the constitutionality of overriding hundreds of years of judicial independence that is expressly packing the Court with those of a specific ideology so that you can get what you want in a move that DIRECTLY violates the notion of an independent judicial branch.

Yeah, again, I didn't make an argument for or against, I was just correcting you when you said it wouldn't be "directly in line with the Constitution." Figured you ought to be precise with your language regarding the Constitution, given your admiration for originalists.

My favorite Supreme Court plan I recall reading, which I think was either Beto's or Buttigieg's (?) was a fifteen person supreme court, with five justices nominated by each party, and then five decided upon by the previous ten. Deemphasis on individual justices, nominations are inherently less partisan, some semblance of cooperation is built into the system.

I wouldn't be opposed to term limits on the Supreme Court, either, because it seems a little morbid to consistently be picking young ideologues instead of possibly more qualified older nominees - I'd prefer them to Senate term limits, at least Senators can be voted out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 27, 2020, 02:51:41 PM
Quote from: delavan
In my neck of the woods we've had Elliot Engel (D-L) and Nita Lowey (D-L) in the House for 30+ years.  Only this year was Elliot defeated in the primary and only because Engel was/went AWOL during the opening months of the rona which his opponent's TV ads (effectively) hammered away at him regarding.

There's the narrative, progressives supposedly can't win anywhere unless the centrist incumbent got caught sleeping
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 27, 2020, 04:08:15 PM
https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/1310282362941513731?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 27, 2020, 04:09:49 PM
https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/1310282362941513731?s=19

Ahahahahahahahahahaha.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 27, 2020, 04:45:40 PM
https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/1310282362941513731?s=19

How were they duped? Haven't the Lincoln Project people been clear all along that they're Republicans who are opposed to the Trump administration, and that when it is removed they will go right back to supporting Republicans?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 27, 2020, 05:04:20 PM
How were they duped? Haven't the Lincoln Project people been clear all along that they're Republicans who are opposed to the Trump administration, and that when it is removed they will go right back to supporting Republicans?

They're not opposed to anything his admin is doing, they just think he's rude
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 27, 2020, 05:26:13 PM
They're not opposed to anything his admin is doing, they just think he's rude

More like they're grifter pieces of excrement with absolutely no rigid positions (except uniformly being hawks) that largely started this nonsense because half of them have 6 figure outstanding tax bills.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 27, 2020, 06:23:26 PM
More like they're grifter pieces of excrement with absolutely no rigid positions (except uniformly being hawks) that largely started this nonsense because half of them have 6 figure outstanding tax bills.

I have respect for your position on hawks; I'm not big on libertarianism, but I do have a significant degree of sympathy with libertarian views on military interventionism. Everything else you said though is a literal description of the person you voted in as President; you don't get to use it as a criticism while ignoring it in your puppet of convenience.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 05, 2020, 12:59:05 PM
throw bill burr onto the list of positive testing officials
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 05, 2020, 04:45:15 PM
throw bill burr onto the list of positive testing officials
Barr.  Who knows, just quarantining now.  I had to look up if there was another Bill Burr besides the comedian.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on October 05, 2020, 04:45:45 PM
I was pretty upset that Bill Burr had it

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 05, 2020, 04:47:50 PM
Lmao oops

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 07, 2020, 09:57:55 AM
https://twitter.com/variety/status/1313592464180117507?s=21

https://twitter.com/repkatiehill/status/1313703826646466562?s=21


Oooof
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 07, 2020, 10:15:32 AM
https://twitter.com/variety/status/1313592464180117507?s=21

https://twitter.com/repkatiehill/status/1313703826646466562?s=21


Oooof

Now do Klobuchar.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 07, 2020, 12:04:53 PM
BREAKING: The DoJ admits the Eatern District of Missouri (led by Jensen who was appointed by Barr) “accidentally” altering the notes of
@petestrzok
 and Andy McCabe in the Flynn filings.

https://twitter.com/MuellerSheWrote/status/1313885867480547334

https://www.emptywheel.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/201007-Flynn-Tampering.pdf


woop-si-daisy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 07, 2020, 12:05:23 PM
https://twitter.com/variety/status/1313592464180117507?s=21

https://twitter.com/repkatiehill/status/1313703826646466562?s=21


Oooof

.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 08, 2020, 11:02:21 AM
This is horrifying.

https://amp.detroitnews.com/amp/5922301002?__twitter_impression=true (https://amp.detroitnews.com/amp/5922301002?__twitter_impression=true)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2020, 11:40:42 AM
This is horrifying.

https://amp.detroitnews.com/amp/5922301002?__twitter_impression=true (https://amp.detroitnews.com/amp/5922301002?__twitter_impression=true)
Just came in to post this.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 08, 2020, 12:06:21 PM
Quote
“Fox referred to Governor Whitmer as ‘this tyrant b----,’ and stated, ‘I don’t know, boys, we gotta do something,” according to the court affidavit.

Lmao idk why but this is exactly what I pictured

“ Michigan Attorney Dana Nessel is set to join with state police, FBI officials and the U.S. attorneys from Detroit and Grand Rapids at 1 p.m. Thursday to announce "details of a major operation" and criminal charges.”

I’m dying to know what their plan was lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2020, 12:12:40 PM
It's just nice to see them actually bust something instead of honeypotting mentally ill teenagers into thinking they've joined ISIS.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on October 08, 2020, 12:30:06 PM
This is horrifying.

https://amp.detroitnews.com/amp/5922301002?__twitter_impression=true (https://amp.detroitnews.com/amp/5922301002?__twitter_impression=true)

Lets not forget that mj defended these lunatics

THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2020, 12:44:28 PM
Lets not forget that mj defended these lunatics

THEY HAVE THE RIGHT TO BEAR ARMS

What kind of weak, stupid derriere piece of excrement would do the following;

1. Put words in someones mouth and accuse them of defending the indefensible.

2. So quickly and voluntarily believe that individual citizens don't have the right to bear arms in a lawful manner because bad people do bad things.

Dumbass.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on October 08, 2020, 12:47:35 PM
What kind of weak, stupid derriere piece of excrement would do the following;

1. Put words in someones mouth and accuse them of defending the indefensible.

2. So quickly and voluntarily believe that individual citizens don't have the right to bear arms in a lawful manner because bad people do bad things.

Dumbass.

Your heroes are actually villains
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2020, 01:03:30 PM
Your heroes are actually villains

That is freaking hilarious coming from someone who will be front and center for Judas and the black messiah or whatever the freak.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on October 08, 2020, 01:05:34 PM
That is freaking hilarious coming from someone who will be front and center for Judas and the black messiah or whatever the freak.

You're goddamn right I will be

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on October 08, 2020, 01:08:42 PM
"Now wait a minute!  It's called ...Black... Messiah?  That's not even possible.  LET ME GET MY AUTOMATIC RIFLE AND OCCUPY THIS REGAL CINEMA!"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2020, 01:12:55 PM
"Now wait a minute!  It's called ...Black... Messiah?  That's not even possible.  LET ME GET MY AUTOMATIC RIFLE AND OCCUPY THIS REGAL CINEMA!"

The Black Panthers were freedom fighters because NPR and Howard Zinn told me so!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2020, 01:24:21 PM


The Black Panthers were good

Ftfy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 08, 2020, 01:27:55 PM
Also, since I love laughing at these assholes:

A St. Louis couple who pointed guns at protesters and appeared at the Republican convention are indicted by a grand jury.

McCloskeys Indicted on Two Felonies (https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/06/us/elections/mccloskey-st-louis-grand-jury.html)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 08, 2020, 01:38:32 PM
LIBERATE MICHIGAN!

Literally a Trump tweet, less than six months ago.

Either he still hasn't understood that his words have consequences, or worse, he has.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2020, 01:41:33 PM
LIBERATE MICHIGAN!

Literally a Trump tweet, less than six months ago.

Either he still hasn't understood that his words have consequences, or worse, he has.
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to reopening Fuddruckers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 08, 2020, 01:43:57 PM
Sometimes I doubt your commitment to reopening Fuddruckers.

SPACE FORCE. VOTE!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 08, 2020, 02:00:18 PM
this must be the funniest board around, mj is constantly telling us how hilarious we all are.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2020, 05:34:48 PM
this must be the funniest board around, mj is constantly telling us how hilarious we all are.
You're Big Jay Oakerson
Seafood is Howie Mandel
mj is Dennis Miller
JE is Eddie Izzard
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 08, 2020, 05:50:47 PM
JE is Eddie Izzard

I take that as a high compliment. I'm assuming he's the only English comic you could think of, but still.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2020, 06:28:35 PM
I take that as a high compliment. I'm assuming he's the only English comic you could think of, but still.
First one I thought of and you're welcome.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 08, 2020, 06:55:22 PM
First one I thought of and you're welcome.

I feel the need to paint my nails and put on a sparkly evening gown.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2020, 07:04:14 PM
"Pro-Kyle Rittenhouse coronavirus denier arrested in plot to kidnap Gretchen Whitmer"

Least surprising information ever
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 08, 2020, 08:13:48 PM
https://www.freep.com/story/news/local/michigan/2020/10/08/whitmer-wolverine-watchmen-militia-michigan/5924617002/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 08, 2020, 08:21:51 PM
I'm looking forward for someone to come here defending these guys and talk about how they're patriots, instead of their usual grandstanding and virtue signalling.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 08, 2020, 08:30:21 PM
I'm looking forward for someone to come here defending these guys and talk about how they're patriots, instead of their usual grandstanding and virtue signalling.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk



I don't think that's fair. mj's position is generally to support people doing shitty things that are at least within shouting distance of a legal argument, he doesn't generally defend out and out lawbreakers. Granted some of those positions can be a bit tortured at times (eg Rittenhouse) but they generally have at least a degree of possible legal salvation.

He hasn't to my memory ever defended the full on nutcases. Although I've no doubt he happily would if there were enough billable hours, he just wouldn't be doing it on here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 08, 2020, 08:32:24 PM
Hey I didn't name names, you're putting words in my mouth.

You're subhuman.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2020, 08:33:01 PM
I don't think that's fair. mj's position is generally to support people doing shitty things that are at least within shouting distance of a legal argument, he doesn't generally defend out and out lawbreakers. Granted some of those positions can be a bit tortured at times (eg Rittenhouse) but they generally have at least a degree of possible legal salvation.

He hasn't to my memory ever defended the full on nutcases. Although I've no doubt he happily would if there were enough billable hours, he just wouldn't be doing it on here.
On the other hand, Whitmer is a member of the evil cabal of Dem governors who are trying to make Trump look bad, so maybe he'll make an exception
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 08, 2020, 09:42:04 PM
I'm looking forward for someone to come here defending these guys and talk about how they're patriots, instead of their usual grandstanding and virtue signalling.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk



*Ahem*

You know she suggested these guys wear masks, right? Right??
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2020, 09:47:23 PM
mj is Dennis Miller

I don't wanna go on a rant here, but Americas foreign policy makes about as much sense as beowolf having sex with robert fulton at the first battle of antitum. I mean, when a neoconservative defenestrates its like Raskolnikov filibustered deoxymonohydroxinate.

I don't think that's fair. mj's position is generally to support people doing shitty things that are at least within shouting distance of a legal argument, he doesn't generally defend out and out lawbreakers. Granted some of those positions can be a bit tortured at times (eg Rittenhouse) but they generally have at least a degree of possible legal salvation.

He hasn't to my memory ever defended the full on nutcases. Although I've no doubt he happily would if there were enough billable hours, he just wouldn't be doing it on here.

While I appreciate the defense (somewhat, as I won't be defending these people anywhere), Rittenhouse getting off via self-defense is going to send this board into a conniption and I for one can't wait.

*Ahem*

You know she suggested these guys wear masks, right? Right??

That's all she's done which is of course why her overreach wasn't smacked down by a federal court the second it was brought before it.

Obviously doesn't warrant a plot to kidnap and murder her. Nor will I be doing any freaking nonsensical rationalizations that I see whenever say a Republican sitting senator gets lit up on a softball field or attacked by a deranged neighbor. This is horrible.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 09, 2020, 12:40:00 PM
Quote
Insane. Michigan sheriff suggests terrorist plot to kidnap governor might have been okay because maybe they just wanted to do a citizen’s arrest.

This interview with a sitting sheriff in Michigan is absolutely wild. https://t.co/h7WKsrAqCZ
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on October 09, 2020, 12:45:08 PM
LMAO
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 09, 2020, 12:49:24 PM
Sounds like someone needs to be elected out of office.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 09, 2020, 01:07:33 PM
fbi needs to investigate this sheriff and what else he has let go


jesus that whole town looks related lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 09, 2020, 05:54:09 PM
fbi needs to investigate this sheriff and what else he has let go


jesus that whole town looks related lmao
It's ok.  He has a mustache.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 10, 2020, 01:47:34 PM
Big shock that as it turns out supposed "right wing nationalists" are actually black flag anarchists that hate Trump.

Do some of you in your rush to believe the first headline ever get tired of being wrong?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 10, 2020, 02:10:09 PM
Big shock that as it turns out supposed "right wing nationalists" are actually black flag anarchists that hate Trump.

Do some of you in your rush to believe the first headline ever get tired of being wrong?



Do you have some kind of legitimate source for this, or is it some kind of twisted No True Scotsman theory?

Edit: I assume you're talking about this, or at least the information contained within it.

https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/michigan-plot-wolverine-watchmen-whitmer.html

I guess it takes us into the whole libertarianism / anarchism discussion. That said, I think it would be highly disingenuous to just dismiss Trump's rhetoric about Michigan and specifically Whitmer as being of no relevance to this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 11, 2020, 09:04:35 AM
I guess it takes us into the whole libertarianism / anarchism discussion. That said, I think it would be highly disingenuous to just dismiss Trump's rhetoric about Michigan and specifically Whitmer as being of no relevance to this.

There is literal video of one of the planners of this stupid bullshit denouncing Trump.

https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1314326901683617792

In b4 "freak Posobiec" as if that changes whats on video.

Saying Trump had anything to do with this is as disingenuous as saying BLM is behind this because one of these douchebags attended a rally in the memory of George Floyd.

https://web.archive.org/web/20201010005927if_/https:/www.washingtonpost.com/national-security/kidnap-plot-whitmer-fox-militia/2020/10/09/ce81751a-0a65-11eb-9be6-cf25fb429f1a_story.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 12, 2020, 01:04:09 AM
Mayor Pete crushing it right now.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201012/b8c9615ed32e10b2e8184589207295b3.jpg)

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 12, 2020, 02:57:21 AM
Mayor Pete crushing it right now.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201012/b8c9615ed32e10b2e8184589207295b3.jpg)

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


Lmao, yeah he’s really killing it by attempting to once again make the “rape or health of the mother” argument when just 1% of women obtain an abortion because they became pregnant through rape, and less than 0.5% do so because of incest, according to the Guttmacher Institute. And he has the unmitigated balls to complain about hypotheticals. That’s almost as hilarious as this little shitbag complaining about government overreach given his platform and stated policies.

Firm believer in the framework set forth by Roe. It’s amazing how the left complains the right wants to gut “abortion rights” yet totally wants to do away with a very pertinent part of the Roe analysis. Anyway, as much as I think abortion is a moral choice best left to the individual, late term abortion is state sanctioned murder and I have no problem summarily judging those who believe in “abortion on demand and without apology“ as absolute monsters.

But the right has been wrong about this issue for forty years now. If  leftists want to cull their own, let them. For example, if you were terminated by the business end of a suction machine, it wouldn’t be any sort of net negative on society.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 12, 2020, 07:39:25 AM
He never mentioned rape or incest once in that response and specifically mentioned the health of the mother multiple times while acknowledging that these pregnancies were expected to be carried to term and are therefore the product of extraordinary circumstances.

For someone who constantly accuses everyone of projection you are really stretching to make argument based on nothing he said in that quote.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 12, 2020, 09:29:44 AM
He never mentioned rape or incest once in that response and specifically mentioned the health of the mother multiple times while acknowledging that these pregnancies were expected to be carried to term and are therefore the product of extraordinary circumstances.

For someone who constantly accuses everyone of projection you are really stretching to make argument based on nothing he said in that quote.

I'm not stretching anything. He has the absolute balls to bitch about hypotheticals invoking emotional reactions before actually (unwittingly) laying out how disingenuous it is to hide behind the "health of the mother" talking point when that makes up for such a small percentage. Surely some sort of carve-out could be (and is) made towards protecting moms life in these situations. Only your most pro-life advocate believes that baby should be carried to term if mom is going to die. You're arguing against no one.

I'd like to thank him for making the case then, that those who think abortion should be on-demand because they're hiding behind 1% of cases are disingenuous at best and freaking disgusting at worst.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 12, 2020, 09:34:44 AM
I'm not stretching anything. He has the absolute balls to bitch about hypotheticals invoking emotional reactions before actually (unwittingly) laying out how disingenuous it is to hide behind the "health of the mother" talking point when that makes up for such a small percentage. Surely some sort of carve-out could be (and is) made towards protecting moms life in these situations. Only your most pro-life advocate believes that baby should be carried to term if mom is going to die. You're arguing against no one.

I'd like to thank him for making the case then, that those who think abortion should be on-demand because they're hiding behind 1% of cases are disingenuous at best and freaking disgusting at worst.

Does anyone actually think that third trimester abortions for any reason other than dire health consequences should be allowed? It's my understanding that elective abortions have a pretty firm cutoff date that no one is reasonably arguing should be changed, is that not right? Genuine question BTW, I honestly don't know the answer. I thought I did.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 12, 2020, 09:41:49 AM
Does anyone actually think that third trimester abortions for any reason other than dire health consequences should be allowed? It's my understanding that elective abortions have a pretty firm cutoff date that no one is reasonably arguing should be changed, is that not right? Genuine question BTW, I honestly don't know the answer. I thought I did.

We have a sitting Governor in this country (governor blackface) who has supported legislation which would end the requirement that third-trimester abortions only be performed after a medical panel determines that the mothers health would be impaired in a fashion thats irreversible and irredeemable. Moms health no longer apparently needs to be at-risk via a medical determination.

Again, I'm under no illusions that there aren't hard-liners within the pro-life movement (i.e. "my side" or whatever the freak) who actually do think that women should just be procreation farms. Hence why even though its not a...sound decision based on actual substance, I've always dug the trimester framework Justice O'Connor set forth in her opinion.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 12, 2020, 10:00:18 AM
I'm not stretching anything. He has the absolute balls to bitch about hypotheticals invoking emotional reactions before actually (unwittingly) laying out how disingenuous it is to hide behind the "health of the mother" talking point when that makes up for such a small percentage. Surely some sort of carve-out could be (and is) made towards protecting moms life in these situations. Only your most pro-life advocate believes that baby should be carried to term if mom is going to die. You're arguing against no one.

I'd like to thank him for making the case then, that those who think abortion should be on-demand because they're hiding behind 1% of cases are disingenuous at best and freaking disgusting at worst.

I'm arguing against you putting words in Mayor Pete's mouth.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 12, 2020, 10:09:55 AM
I'm arguing against you putting words in Mayor Pete's mouth.


That's not what I'm doing, he made the health of the mother argument.

No, he didn't make the rape or incest argument, but that usually follows, nor does it make a difference when those are exactly the type of hypotheticals that invoke an emotional reaction that he's arguing against.

If he'd come out unequivocally and say that late term abortions are a grave and desperate action, only to be taken under the guidance of a medical determination that mom is at risk, then we might have some common ground here today. I'm not arguing that dangerous or risky pregnancies should be carried to term.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 12, 2020, 10:52:30 AM


Does anyone actually think that third trimester abortions for any reason other than dire health consequences should be allowed?

Only pathetic right wing males who have no hope of procreation anyways.


Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 12, 2020, 10:54:01 AM



No, he didn't make the rape or incest argument, but that usually follows

So you lied. Got it.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on October 12, 2020, 08:31:46 PM
couple things:
1. Buttigieg definitely said that in January/February when he was still running for president. Definitely wasn't said to be pertinent to the current supreme court justice nomination.
2. Buttigieg also is very invested in grounding basic Dem policy with language regarding faith - his argument is one that is trying to appeal to swayable Christians to appeal to their sense of empathy. Whether right or wrong, he has had his angle he consistently tries to work.
3. There is no medical definition of a late-term abortion, but most abortions that happen past the 20th week are because the women trying to get the abortion lives far away from a clinic/can't afford the time off to go/can't afford the procedure/won't get it covered under their insurance. Which is why Roe vs Wade can still be upheld but abortion access still be fucked up. When you only allow abortions for people who are 20+ weeks pregnant when it's medically necessary, but put up roadblocks in access to abortion clinics, you are de facto prohibiting certain people from getting abortions while still upholding previous SC decisions.

Republicans right now are generally not attempting to overturn Roe vs Wade, they tend to just put up huge hurdles for women to get abortions quickly, and then make up some deadline when abortions turn into "state sanctioned murder," which allow them to win their fight while saying they respect the Supreme Court. Focusing on Roe v Wade is just political shorthand for both parties to activate parts of their base.

edit: oh yeah, and 4. mj making up talking points regarding what Buttigieg probably meant to say/argue is hilariously on brand.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 12, 2020, 08:51:12 PM
Does anyone actually think that third trimester abortions for any reason other than dire health consequences should be allowed? It's my understanding that elective abortions have a pretty firm cutoff date that no one is reasonably arguing should be changed, is that not right? Genuine question BTW, I honestly don't know the answer. I thought I did.
Nobody gets shits and giggles abortions that late, you don't need to outlaw them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 12, 2020, 09:09:20 PM
Nobody gets shits and giggles abortions that late, you don't need to outlaw them.
I don't understand why anyone thinks someone would wait until giving birth to have an abortion without a major, dire medical reason.  Nor would any doctor (even if it was reduced from a panel of three to 1 doctor) give the OK on that for any medical reason.  I've lost a lot of hope for humanity lately, but not that much.  That's just fear mongering.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 12, 2020, 09:15:53 PM

Only pathetic right wing males who have no hope of procreation anyways.


Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

The fact that you've actually procreated is a net negative on society.


edit: oh yeah, and 4. mj making up talking points regarding what Buttigieg probably meant to say/argue is hilariously on brand.

I'm done getting into the rest of your stupidity and trying to have an actual conversation when you continually cherrypick and completely mischaracterize what I say. It's chronic and annoying as excrement, but now pathetically sad when you have to essentially parrot IATA.

I totally made up a talking point by bringing up his own talking point and then bringing up the two most associated with it. Dumb.

I don't understand why anyone thinks someone would wait until giving birth to have an abortion without a major, dire medical reason.  Nor would any doctor (even if it was reduced from a panel of three to 1 doctor) give the OK on that for any medical reason.  I've lost a lot of hope for humanity lately, but not that much.  That's just fear mongering.

Then what is the issue with having that be codified?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 12, 2020, 09:18:21 PM
I don't understand why anyone thinks someone would wait until giving birth to have an abortion without a major, dire medical reason.  Nor would any doctor (even if it was reduced from a panel of three to 1 doctor) give the OK on that for any medical reason.  I've lost a lot of hope for humanity lately, but not that much.  That's just fear mongering.
Well ACKSHULLY I have this article from freedom eagle dot biz that says a woman named LaStereotype Jackson got an abortion on a perfectly healthy baby at 39 weeks and 6 days
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 12, 2020, 09:21:17 PM


Then what is the issue with having that be codified?

Because it's more likely that a 3rd party arbiter would force someone to carry a bad pregnancy to term than it is that a pregnant woman would yeet a baby at the 11th hour for no good reason.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 12, 2020, 09:23:58 PM

Because it's more likely that a 3rd party arbiter would force someone to carry a bad pregnancy to term than it is that a pregnant woman would yeet a baby at the 11th hour for no good reason.
You word things better than I do.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on October 13, 2020, 09:43:02 AM
I'm done getting into the rest of your stupidity and trying to have an actual conversation when you continually cherrypick and completely mischaracterize what I say. It's chronic and annoying as excrement, but now pathetically sad when you have to essentially parrot IATA.

Oh no, mischaracterizing what other people are saying, I'm making such a charade of the forum
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 13, 2020, 09:51:02 AM
Oh no, mischaracterizing what other people are saying, I'm making such a charade of the forum

ahahahahahahahahahahahah
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 13, 2020, 08:58:08 PM
Pope would come back if ACB was a mod here

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201014/b8ba8aa5eb52d1599ba37a4b522a61ab.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 17, 2020, 10:26:18 AM
 
  18 days to go with this bullshit
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 17, 2020, 11:19:42 AM

Because it's more likely that a 3rd party arbiter would force someone to carry a bad pregnancy to term than it is that a pregnant woman would yeet a baby at the 11th hour for no good reason.

Wrong. There's absolutely no proof of this, and taking the decision out of the hands of medical professionals was part of Buttigieg's whole rant.

Oh no, mischaracterizing what other people are saying, I'm making such a charade of the forum

I just don't enjoy engaging in people who are stupid/shitty enough to do that.

Anyway, do I make another Lieawatha joke or will that send you down another tangent?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 17, 2020, 11:35:33 AM
I'm gonna do a rewrite of the Fred Hampton movie and insert a 5 minute monologue where he explains why property destruction is just as bad as systemic racism

https://twitter.com/runolgarun/status/1317351207367684105?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 17, 2020, 11:37:23 AM
I'm gonna do a rewrite of the Fred Hampton movie and insert a 5 minute monologue where he explains why property destruction is just as bad as systemic racism

https://twitter.com/runolgarun/status/1317351207367684105?s=19

They already wrote the fictional version where he's some sort of non-racist freedom fighter.

On an unrelated note, good to see Ice Cube getting excrement from the left for the high crime of working with the sitting President on legislation to help enrich communities he's advocating for.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 17, 2020, 11:40:32 AM
They already wrote the fictional version where he's some sort of non-racist freedom fighter.

On an unrelated note, good to see Ice Cube getting excrement from the left for the high crime of working with the sitting President on legislation to help enrich communities he's advocating for.
Stop using left and liberal interchangeably. Libs are mad he's not cheering the blue team, leftists understand the blue team offered nothing.

Also Fred Hampton was good, the Black Panthers were good, and only racists disagree.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on October 17, 2020, 10:42:59 PM
Wrong. There's absolutely no proof of this, and taking the decision out of the hands of medical professionals was part of Buttigieg's whole rant.

I just don't enjoy engaging in people who are stupid/shitty enough to do that.

oh no, the irony of mischaracterizing what Buttigieg is saying and then immediately pivoting to being hurt about being mischaracterized is too much
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 18, 2020, 03:12:24 AM
oh no, the irony of mischaracterizing what Buttigieg is saying and then immediately pivoting to being hurt about being mischaracterized is too much

Except I didn't mischaracterize anything.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 18, 2020, 09:51:26 AM
Except I didn't mischaracterize anything.
Besides most everything you've posted here, sure ok that's fair.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 18, 2020, 10:25:54 AM
https://twitter.com/sadydoyle/status/1316358312917639169?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 18, 2020, 11:24:42 AM
Besides most everything you've posted here, sure ok that's fair.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Says someone with the IQ of a wet fart.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 18, 2020, 11:26:40 AM
Says someone with the IQ of a wet fart.
"subhuman scum"

Poor baby :(

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 18, 2020, 09:29:21 PM
The constitution doesn't say rape is bad I guess

https://twitter.com/MaxKennerly/status/1317596083430764544?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on October 18, 2020, 09:35:16 PM
The constitution doesn't say rape is bad I guess

https://twitter.com/MaxKennerly/status/1317596083430764544?s=19
That means Tommy can come back i guess
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on October 19, 2020, 02:17:10 AM
The constitution doesn't say rape is bad I guess

https://twitter.com/MaxKennerly/status/1317596083430764544?s=19

I mean, it doesn't say anything about rape so yeah
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 19, 2020, 12:26:31 PM
I love Clancy Brown

https://twitter.com/realclancybrown/status/1318234861816082432?s=21 (https://twitter.com/realclancybrown/status/1318234861816082432?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 19, 2020, 01:37:42 PM
https://twitter.com/ASavageNation/status/1318226459756879873?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 19, 2020, 08:53:23 PM
Turns about Tommy Tuberville is a piece of excrement. I. Am. Shocked. (https://twitter.com/FPWellman/status/1318307148737048577?s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 20, 2020, 01:05:37 PM
This will be fun to watch.

https://www.businessinsider.com/doj-google-antitrust-case-revealed-2020-10

Interesting that they picked Google as the test case rather than one of the social media companies, I would have thought that Google is better able to defend itself than Facebook or Twitter. Maybe the view is that Google is also better able and more likely to reach a deal to divest bits of itself, which will then create precedent through which they can apply pressure to the rest of FAANG. Amazon will be the really tough nut to crack though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 20, 2020, 08:29:00 PM
https://twitter.com/bpmehlman/status/1318714671470436352?s=21

This chart
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 20, 2020, 08:33:14 PM
https://twitter.com/bpmehlman/status/1318714671470436352?s=21

This chart
In reality racists have greater control over both parties than socialists do of either.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 20, 2020, 09:06:46 PM
In reality racists have greater control over both parties than socialists do of either.

That's a statement that's at best quite disingenuous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 20, 2020, 09:42:10 PM
That's a statement that's at best quite disingenuous.
Step 1. Get a list of elected Dems at the federal level

Step 2. Count the socialists

Step 3. Count the racists

Step 4. Compare

It would be too easy to prove my point if I included large donors in this, so I kept it narrow.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 21, 2020, 04:34:27 PM
SOCIALISM!

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/21/business/purdue-pharma-guilty-plea/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 21, 2020, 09:02:16 PM
SOCIALISM!

https://www.cnn.com/2020/10/21/business/purdue-pharma-guilty-plea/index.html
freak THE SACKLERS
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 21, 2020, 09:19:52 PM
government selling oxycontin, what could go wrong?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 23, 2020, 05:46:11 PM
An actual real life congressman

https://twitter.com/RepClayHiggins/status/1319715219216674817?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on October 23, 2020, 05:55:33 PM
An actual real life congressman

https://twitter.com/RepClayHiggins/status/1319715219216674817?s=19

hahahaha

what indeed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on October 23, 2020, 05:56:44 PM
why have people become such babies

remember the 'i put a mask on and within seconds literally felt like i couldn't breathe' guy?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 23, 2020, 06:32:43 PM
Everyone named Clay is retarded. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 23, 2020, 07:22:26 PM
An actual real life congressman

https://twitter.com/RepClayHiggins/status/1319715219216674817?s=19

Cocaine is a hell of a drug.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 23, 2020, 07:25:43 PM
OK, who did what to Mitch McConnell?https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/mitch-mcconnell-bruised-hands.amp (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/mitch-mcconnell-bruised-hands.amp)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 23, 2020, 11:02:04 PM
OK, who did what to Mitch McConnell?https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/mitch-mcconnell-bruised-hands.amp (https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2020/10/mitch-mcconnell-bruised-hands.amp)
He's taking colloidal silver to ward off covid
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 26, 2020, 07:57:04 PM
Welp, freak the Senate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 26, 2020, 09:00:07 PM
they just guaranteed a strong push for expanded courts, AOC and Ilhan and others are already tweeting about it.

congrats, you played yourselves
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 26, 2020, 09:26:52 PM
they just guaranteed a strong push for expanded courts, AOC and Ilhan and others are already tweeting about it.

congrats, you played yourselves

I'm playing myself by responding to you, but if you think those morons account for any more than at most 1/4th of the voting public, you're wrong.

But given how its obvious none of you learned anything from Reid nuking the filibuster, fine, go for it. I look forward to the GOP retaking the senate and further expanding the Court, even though its a total freaking farce.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 26, 2020, 09:26:57 PM
they just guaranteed a strong push for expanded courts, AOC and Ilhan and others are already tweeting about it.

congrats, you played yourselves
Unfortunately the Dems with the actual power to do anything about this are too worried about losing the votes of Kasich Republicans in 2024
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 26, 2020, 09:28:31 PM


I'm playing myself by responding to you, but if you think those morons account for any more than at most 1/4th of the voting public, you're wrong.

But given how its obvious none of you learned anything from Reid nuking the filibuster, fine, go for it. I look forward to the GOP retaking the senate and further expanding the Court, even though its a total freaking farce.

They account for more of America than ACB and the heinous ideology she serves
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 26, 2020, 09:38:48 PM
I'm playing myself by responding to you, but if you think those morons account for any more than at most 1/4th of the voting public, you're wrong.

But given how its obvious none of you learned anything from Reid nuking the filibuster, fine, go for it. I look forward to the GOP retaking the senate and further expanding the Court, even though its a total freaking farce.

why are you the way you are? why couldnt you just respond like a normal, sane person for once?

regardless, her and her ilk have shown their significant funding abilities, and that gives them a larger voice amongst the (potentially) new look democrats if they win the senate. biden seemed open to the idea, especially given how ACB was rammed down the nations throats and her, at best, questionable record as a judge. it's well within the realm of possibility, and trumps and the courts actions after the election would likely be a heavy factor in if they do it.

well see. 7 days.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 26, 2020, 09:39:37 PM
Unfortunately the Dems with the actual power to do anything about this are too worried about losing the votes of Kasich Republicans in 2024

schumer and pelosi need to gtfo already
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 26, 2020, 09:39:48 PM
I'm playing myself by responding to you, but if you think those morons account for any more than at most 1/4th of the voting public, you're wrong.

But given how its obvious none of you learned anything from Reid nuking the filibuster, fine, go for it. I look forward to the GOP retaking the senate and further expanding the Court, even though its a total freaking farce.



The GOP have been packing the state courts for years so I wouldn't put it past them.

McConnell's plays in 2016 and this year with the court has been one of the most despicable and destabilizing acts I have seen from the Senate.

Senate republicans knew from the beginning what the Democrats were going to do if they retook the chamber and went ahead anyway.

I'm not for packing SCOTUS but I'll take it over the damage Barrett and the damage that could be wrought by her horrendous views. Civil liberties mean more than procedural tradition at this point. Unless one of the conservative judges has the decency to resign to restore some semblance of balance.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 26, 2020, 09:41:24 PM
I LIKE BEER seems more than happy to reopen excrement, too

freak em
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 26, 2020, 09:41:42 PM
Unfortunately the Dems with the actual power to do anything about this are too worried about losing the votes of Kasich Republicans in 2024

Booker for Majority Leader.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 26, 2020, 09:43:33 PM
I LIKE BEER seems more than happy to reopen excrement, too

freak em

If anyone deserves to be severely injured in a freak accident by driving over a traffic security barrier only to have it activate and flip his car it's this poopchute.

EDIT: wrong quote.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 27, 2020, 12:40:39 AM

They account for more of America than ACB and the heinous ideology she serves

Lol, what ideology is that?

McConnell's plays in 2016 and this year with the court has been one of the most despicable and destabilizing acts I have seen from the Senate.

Look I get that you're enough of a partisan hack to think that Justice Kavanaugh should be severely injured, (get a grip, psycho) but how many more times do you want to make it very clear you either don't give a excrement, or were in a coma from 2007 to 15.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 27, 2020, 12:44:10 AM
why are you the way you are? why couldnt you just respond like a normal, sane person for once?

regardless, her and her ilk have shown their significant funding abilities, and that gives them a larger voice amongst the (potentially) new look democrats if they win the senate. biden seemed open to the idea, especially given how ACB was rammed down the nations throats and her, at best, questionable record as a judge. it's well within the realm of possibility, and trumps and the courts actions after the election would likely be a heavy factor in if they do it.

well see. 7 days.

Why are you the way you are asks the vitriolic psycho. Get some fuckin self-awareness.

Not even touching the rest of this stupidity except to laugh at the idea that you've even looked at her judicial record as opposed to regurgitated whatever r/pol told you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 27, 2020, 01:00:29 AM

Lmao not even worth it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 27, 2020, 01:06:53 AM
I care greatly about Republican efforts to wholesale block the nominations of 76 federal court and executive .

McConnell’s invoking of the nuclear option on Supreme Court nominees cosigned the death of the filibuster that Reid started.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 27, 2020, 03:43:31 AM
Lmao not even worth it

Yeah, typical.

McConnell’s invoking of the nuclear option on Supreme Court nominees cosigned the death of the filibuster that Reid started.

“How dare they use the tactics we were using against us!”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 27, 2020, 07:35:22 AM
If Reid was being shortsighted in his tactics then McConnell is just as guilty.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 27, 2020, 02:14:58 PM


Yeah, typical.

How's this for a track record, you subhuman retard?

I'd love to review her case record with you, too bad there isn't one to review.

Keep sucking his orange dick tho, you stupid freak.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201027/c18821a06b567623032369a1f59337df.jpg)

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 27, 2020, 06:35:16 PM

How's this for a track record, you subhuman retard?

I'd love to review her case record with you, too bad there isn't one to review.

Keep sucking his orange dick tho, you stupid freak.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201027/c18821a06b567623032369a1f59337df.jpg)

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

I guess it wouldn't matter to you, you dumb lover of the older lady that unlike ACB who actually sat on the bench, Elena Kagan had absolutely ZERO in the way of experience as a judge and largely made her career much like ACB in academia before being nominated and confirmed.

FWIW, by "case record" I meant her holdings while on the bench. Which we can review. Again, unlike Kagan.

Like I said, keep regurgitating what you see on r/pol and MSNBC (lmao) you stupid sack of excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 27, 2020, 07:12:22 PM


I guess it wouldn't matter to you, you dumb lover of the older lady that unlike ACB who actually sat on the bench, Elena Kagan had absolutely ZERO in the way of experience as a judge and largely made her career much like ACB in academia before being nominated and confirmed.

FWIW, by "case record" I meant her holdings while on the bench. Which we can review. Again, unlike Kagan.

Like I said, keep regurgitating what you see on r/pol and MSNBC (lmao) you stupid sack of excrement.

If you can't see the glaring difference between the 2 judges, you're even freaking dumber than you come off. Like honestly, this is one of the freaking more retarded arguments you've diarrhead out.

I'd love to review the rulings and opinions of acb, but you know as well as everyone else here you can't do that with out resorting to lame derriere insults constantly because you're such a freaking chud.

But keep regurgitating what you see on r/thedonald and oan (lmao), you troglodite incel.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 27, 2020, 10:18:54 PM
If you can't see the glaring difference between the 2 judges, you're even freaking dumber than you come off. Like honestly, this is one of the freaking more retarded arguments you've diarrhead out.

Nice non-argument wrapped up in insult because if there isn't something to be found on the first google search, you have nothing. What a freaking simpleton.

I'd love to review the rulings and opinions of acb, but you know as well as everyone else here you can't do that with out resorting to lame derriere insults constantly because you're such a freaking chud.

But keep regurgitating what you see on r/thedonald and oan (lmao), you troglodite incel.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

HAHAHAHAHAHA nice last sentence. So we know two things about you, you're stupid AND unoriginal. Bonus points for use of the term "chud."

You're pathetic.


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 27, 2020, 10:20:07 PM


Lol, what ideology is that?

Conservative jurisprudence, where a bunch of ghouls protect the powerful and crush the weak while pretending they're just neutral vessels through which the Godstitution speaks to us
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 27, 2020, 10:30:06 PM
Moved the ACB shitposts in here to keep them separate from the election shitposts
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 28, 2020, 08:22:57 AM
Nice non-argument wrapped up in insult because if there isn't something to be found on the first google search, you have nothing. What a freaking simpleton.

HAHAHAHAHAHA nice last sentence. So we know two things about you, you're stupid AND unoriginal. Bonus points for use of the term "chud."

You're pathetic.
I was mocking you, retard.

How could miss the obvious mocking?

Wait, right. Trump supporter. Sorry.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 28, 2020, 08:24:55 AM
Nice non-argument wrapped up in insult because if there isn't something to be found on the first google search, you have nothing. What a freaking simpleton.

HAHAHAHAHAHA nice last sentence. So we know two things about you, you're stupid AND unoriginal. Bonus points for use of the term "chud."

You're pathetic.



I was mocking you, retard.

How could miss the obvious mocking?

Wait, right. Trump supporter. Sorry.

Sent from my Pixel 3 XL using Tapatalk


(https://i.imgur.com/R2ggjRn.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on October 28, 2020, 08:32:43 AM
^ such a beautiful moment. *random Sarah McLaughlan song starts playing*  #nohomo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 28, 2020, 10:54:12 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/R2ggjRn.gif)


LMAO, like either of us are in that good of shape.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 28, 2020, 11:26:14 PM
An actual real life congressman

https://twitter.com/RepClayHiggins/status/1319715219216674817?s=19


What my Jets friends think i do on twitter:


                            ?



What I actually do on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/dril/status/1319738022947024898?s=21

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 29, 2020, 07:59:56 AM

What my Jets friends think i do on twitter:


                            ?



What I actually do on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/dril/status/1319738022947024898?s=21
What indeed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on October 29, 2020, 12:17:46 PM
*moved to election thread*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 29, 2020, 12:19:51 PM
There is a Russian-based hacker group currently attacking US hospitals with ransomware attacks. People have actually died because systems were locked down.

The FBI suspects that same group to ramp up hospital attacks and take aim at the election next week as well.

Can't wait to hear about the Russian hoax in a few weeks. Or the more nightmarish scenario where the current president, if he loses, claiming it was all due to massive interference and what we need right now is stability from the federal government. Rudy attempted to remain NYC's mayor under a post-911 aftermath stability guise after Bloomberg won.

Let’s be real, whether he wins or loses, someone is going to blame Russia.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 29, 2020, 12:29:43 PM
Let’s be real, whether he wins or loses, someone is going to blame Russia.
Russia blames themselves just to freak with our head.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 29, 2020, 04:56:57 PM
Quote
ALBANY, N.Y. — Senators Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren entered an unexpected clash on Tuesday with New York Democratic leaders over the fate of a progressive third party.

The dispute stems from a political flier paid for by the state party featuring Joseph R. Biden Jr., his running mate, Senator Kamala Harris, and Senators Warren and Sanders, all smiling and pleading with New Yorkers to vote “Democratic — all the way!”

But Ms. Warren and Mr. Sanders said they were not consulted about the flier, and had they been, they would not have consented to the ad, which pushes voters to cast ballots on the Democratic Party line.

Both senators support the Biden-Harris ticket, but want ballots cast for the candidates on the Working Families Party line, which has backed them in the past.

Mr. Sanders accused the state Democratic Party, which is effectively controlled by Gov. Andrew M. Cuomo, of trying to sabotage the Working Families Party.

“It is absolutely unacceptable for the New York Democratic Party, which just a few short months ago supported canceling the presidential primary, to now use my image in a push to punish the Working Families Party,” Mr. Sanders, an independent from Vermont, said in a statement.

“They never asked my permission and I wouldn’t have given it if they had,” he said. “I believe New Yorkers should vote for Joe Biden and Kamala Harris on the Working Families Party line.”

That sentiment was echoed by Kristen Orthman, a spokeswoman for Ms. Warren, who said the Massachusetts senator “didn’t approve this ad” and asked that digital versions of it “be taken down.”

Under state law, candidates in New York can collect votes on several different party lines, a system known as fusion voting. But under a new law adopted this year, political parties in New York have to earn 130,000 votes — or 2 percent of the total vote — every two years in order to automatically retain their ballot lines. Parties that do not reach that threshold would have to petition for their candidates to appear.
State Democratic officials acknowledged that they did not seek permission from either senator, or the Biden ticket, to use their images, but defended the $357,000 campaign, which also included digital advertisements using images of Senators Warren and Sanders.

“My interaction with them is none,” said Jay Jacobs, the chairman of the New York State Democratic Committee and a longtime ally of Mr. Cuomo’s. “The entire piece simply speaks to voting for Democrats up and down the ballot.”

“My job is to get voters out to vote on the Democratic line,” he added. “And there’s nothing wrong with that.”

Mr. Jacobs said that the mailer and digital ads were meant to “increase down-ballot voting” for Democrats, some of whom do not appear on the Working Families line.

“I don’t see how Elizabeth Warren would be upset with that,” he said. “And I don’t see how, frankly, Bernie Sanders would be upset with that.”

Mr. Cuomo’s unpleasant history with the Working Families Party dates back several years, including a fraught nomination process in 2014. It reached a low point in 2018, when the W.F.P., which had been founded in the late 1990s and backed by various labor groups, chose to support Cynthia Nixon, the actress, in her challenge to Mr. Cuomo in the Democratic primary.

Some of those labor supporters fled, and Mr. Cuomo won the September primary easily after spending more than $20 million. He was subsequently elected to a third term, as the W.F.P. capitulated and gave the governor its line, where he received more than 114,000 votes.

In 2019, Mr. Cuomo announced the formation of a new commission to look into public financing of campaigns, albeit with an unusual caveat: The panel could also examine ballot eligibility levels for third parties, such as the W.F.P.

Third-party leaders feared that the governor intended to threaten their existence, and two parties — the Working Families Party and the Conservative Party — sued to challenge the commission’s authority. The parties’ fears were soon realized: In November 2019, the commission voted to increase the eligibility levels.

The parties won their lawsuit earlier this year, but the commission’s recommendations still went forward after being incorporated into this year’s budget deal.

In recent weeks, a roster of progressive lawmakers — including Senator Warren and Representative Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York — have called on voters to cast ballots for Mr. Biden on the W.F.P. line: Row D. They note that those votes “count the same, to beat Trump.”

That message was voiced again on Tuesday at a Lower Manhattan rally attended by Senator Chuck Schumer of New York, the New York City public advocate, Jumaane Williams, and an array of state legislators.

NY Times
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 29, 2020, 08:31:03 PM
NY Dem machine hates the WFP (because they're good). But the WFP also fucked up their presidential primary endorsement.

7 of the votes I cast on my ballot were on the WFP line but I won't be distraught if they get killed off.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 29, 2020, 08:51:36 PM
NY Dem machine hates the WFP (because they're good). But the WFP also fucked up their presidential primary endorsement.

7 of the votes I cast on my ballot were on the WFP line but I won't be distraught if they get killed off.

Your voting process is ludicrous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 29, 2020, 10:00:00 PM
Your voting process is ludicrous.
Someone like you should be happy the WFP exists because it's a compromise between strategic voting and signaling which direction I want the Dems to move in.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 30, 2020, 06:39:10 AM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201030/23a409b088924da67c6a2ba72d3bad4a.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on October 30, 2020, 06:45:11 AM
I guess it wouldn't matter to you, you dumb lover of the older lady that unlike ACB who actually sat on the bench, Elena Kagan had absolutely ZERO in the way of experience as a judge and largely made her career much like ACB in academia before being nominated and confirmed.

FWIW, by "case record" I meant her holdings while on the bench. Which we can review. Again, unlike Kagan.

Like I said, keep regurgitating what you see on r/pol and MSNBC (lmao) you stupid sack of excrement.
Why are you such a miserable person?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 30, 2020, 07:21:27 AM
Why are you such a miserable person?

oh boy, youve brought down the wrath of the lonely man from jersey upon you. i pray for your well-being when you got a few of the only insults he seems to know.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 30, 2020, 07:21:41 AM
Kagan sucks (see: Dershowitz/Finkelstein) but ACB is worse
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 30, 2020, 07:23:06 AM
Tucker now says we should leave Hunter Biden alone. lmao

https://www.thedailybeast.com/tucker-carlson-suddenly-says-its-time-to-leave-hunter-biden-alone

Quote
“There are a lot of documents about Hunter Biden’s personal life that we haven’t brought to you and we are not going to and we will tell you why,” he said, noting the obvious reason that Hunter is not running for president.

“But Hunter Biden is a fallen man at this point,” Carlson stated, adding that he once knew the younger Biden well.

“I never thought Hunter Biden was a bad person,” he concluded. “I thought he had demons but in the time I knew him he kept them mostly under control. At some point, he lost control of those demons and the world knows that now. He's now humiliated and alone. Probably too strong to say we feel sorry for Hunter Biden, but the point is pounding on a man, jumping on, and piling on when he's already down is something we don't want to be involved in.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on October 30, 2020, 07:23:12 AM
Tucker’s Timeline:

“I have the goods. It’s devastating. You won’t believe what’s in it. I’ll reveal it tomorrow.”

“Someone stole the goods. I can’t reveal it because someone stole it and I don’t have it, so I can’t tell you what’s in it.”

“I found it. It turned up. It’s very suspicious how it was gone, but now it’s back. Anyway, I had a copy all along. I mean, I’m not stupid.”

“We still can’t tell you what’s in it because we’re still looking at it to see what’s in it, though we had a copy the whole time I told you that it was stolen.”

“Let’s not all be hasty now.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 30, 2020, 07:23:47 AM
Please show some respect for the 47th President bro
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 30, 2020, 07:32:51 AM
Why are you such a miserable person?

Lmao how is this reserved for me?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 30, 2020, 07:46:24 AM
Lmao how is this reserved for me?



Have you read your posts?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 30, 2020, 07:52:33 AM
Have you read your posts?

Seriously, is it a general lack of awareness, or do some of you freaking people actually think you get to have carte blanche to say to me before you get treated in kind?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 30, 2020, 08:00:40 AM
Seriously, is it a general lack of awareness, or do some of you freaking people actually think you get to have carte blanche to say to me before you get treated in kind?



Yeah, that's the stuff.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 30, 2020, 08:01:46 AM
Yeah, that's the stuff.

K, show me where I ever wished death on you and yours because of your vote.

Or I ever told you to kill yourself.

Etc, etc etc.

I'll chalk it up to general lack of awareness. Wouldn't want to think you're a raging hypocrite or anything.

It's almost like there's certain people on the board I clearly don't agree with who are spared any sort of vitriol because of how they talk to me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on October 30, 2020, 08:39:53 AM
K, show me where I ever wished death on you and yours because of your vote.

Or I ever told you to kill yourself.

Etc, etc etc.

I'll chalk it up to general lack of awareness. Wouldn't want to think you're a raging hypocrite or anything.

It's almost like there's certain people on the board I clearly don't agree with who are spared any sort of vitriol because of how they talk to me.

Vote Biden and forgiveness will be granted to you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 30, 2020, 08:42:42 AM
Vote Biden and forgiveness will be granted to you.

How weird
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on October 30, 2020, 08:43:39 AM
How weird

i'm in a charitable mood today.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 30, 2020, 10:59:12 AM
i'm in a charitable mood today.

The crazy thing is, what with your power trip last time in flaunting your mod power I'm not even sure if you're kidding.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on October 30, 2020, 11:03:52 AM
The crazy thing is, what with your power trip last time in flaunting your mod power I'm not even sure if you're kidding.



that wasn't mod power...that was me resting my nutsack on your forehead.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on October 30, 2020, 11:07:51 AM
K, show me where I ever wished death on you and yours because of your vote.

Or I ever told you to kill yourself.

Etc, etc etc.

I'll chalk it up to general lack of awareness. Wouldn't want to think you're a raging hypocrite or anything.

It's almost like there's certain people on the board I clearly don't agree with who are spared any sort of vitriol because of how they talk to me.
I'm not a problem because I never wished death upon someone.

interesting philosophy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on October 30, 2020, 11:08:39 AM
that wasn't mod power...that was me resting my nutsack on your forehead.

I... You... eghh   ;D
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 30, 2020, 11:11:28 AM
I... You... eghh   ;D
osme of you post, but I you've
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 30, 2020, 11:21:53 AM
that wasn't mod power...that was me resting my nutsack on your forehead.

LMAO yeah thats what you did as you went on a bigger mood swing then a fourteen year old girl.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on October 30, 2020, 01:41:57 PM
LMAO yeah thats what you did as you went on a bigger mood swing then a fourteen year old girl.

LMAOOOO
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 31, 2020, 02:01:27 PM
This is an excellent and logical idea.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/523743-oregon-voters-to-decide-on-decriminalizing-heroin-cocaine-and-lsd

This is exactly how the whole Defund The Police movement should work; remove police involvement with people in vulnerable situations, stop criminalizing possession, and spend the money saved (and generated through legalized drug sales) on providing them with help. You can give police forces less money by not requiring them to be involved with situations that they aren't helping.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 31, 2020, 02:46:11 PM


You can give police forces less money by not requiring them to be involved with situations that they aren't helping.

That's already the foundational idea of defunding the police.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 31, 2020, 03:13:51 PM

That's already the foundational idea of defunding the police.

Yes, I am aware. Many others are apparently not. I chose to use this story as a clear example of how the model should work, versus the whole "socialists just want police to not exist" narrative that they prefer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 31, 2020, 07:20:27 PM
This is an excellent and logical idea.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/523743-oregon-voters-to-decide-on-decriminalizing-heroin-cocaine-and-lsd

This is exactly how the whole Defund The Police movement should work; remove police involvement with people in vulnerable situations, stop criminalizing possession, and spend the money saved (and generated through legalized drug sales) on providing them with help. You can give police forces less money by not requiring them to be involved with situations that they aren't helping.

I'm all for this.

NJ had legalizing marijuana on the ballot this year. I'm hoping it finally passes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 31, 2020, 07:43:11 PM
I'm all for this.

NJ had legalizing marijuana on the ballot this year. I'm hoping it finally passes.

Since we legalized it, the number of people dying from marijuana overdoses has gone from 0 to 0. I don't know what the numbers are for increased tax revenue vs savings from reallocated policing and the economic value of people not being arrested and incarcerated, but I'm pretty sure they're good.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 31, 2020, 08:12:31 PM
Since we legalized it, the number of people dying from marijuana overdoses has gone from 0 to 0. I don't know what the numbers are for increased tax revenue vs savings from reallocated policing and the economic value of people not being arrested and incarcerated, but I'm pretty sure they're good.

Portugal saw precipitous drops in ODs when they decriminalized. I'm hoping Oregon is the start of a trend.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 06, 2020, 08:18:14 AM
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/san-francisco-voters-pass-overpaid-executive-tax-n1246644
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 06, 2020, 10:36:59 AM
Like clockwork, the ghouls pretending to care about the deficit under a Dem administration

https://twitter.com/ReporterCioffi/status/1324743384427352066?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 06, 2020, 10:48:59 AM
Like clockwork, the ghouls pretending to care about the deficit under a Dem administration

https://twitter.com/ReporterCioffi/status/1324743384427352066?s=19

Didn’t really seem to care about that for the last four years.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 06, 2020, 10:53:38 AM
Didn’t really seem to care about that for the last four years.
They never do.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 06, 2020, 11:06:27 AM
They never do.

I’m still going to keep writing in to my reps in Congress with my plan to reduce government spending: reduce Congressional salaries.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 06, 2020, 01:24:33 PM
Didn’t really seem to care about that for the last four years.

I agree with you but they were real shitheads during all of the Coronavirus stim package discussions, even with a Trump presidency.  That said, it’ll prob get worse if they hold the senate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 06, 2020, 01:37:03 PM
https://twitter.com/mrotzie/status/1324793715915923464?s=21 (https://twitter.com/mrotzie/status/1324793715915923464?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 06, 2020, 01:44:03 PM
https://www.nbcnews.com/business/business-news/san-francisco-voters-pass-overpaid-executive-tax-n1246644
  Good for them.


Like clockwork, the ghouls pretending to care about the deficit under a Dem administration

https://twitter.com/ReporterCioffi/status/1324743384427352066?s=19
  Neocons like Bush (i.e. the Lincoln Project / Bill Kristol types) ran up quite a tab with their cockeyed interventionism.   
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 06, 2020, 10:26:45 PM
Most punchable face in Congress?

-Matt Gaetz
-Ted Cruz
-Trey Gowdy
-Lindsey Graham
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 06, 2020, 10:33:47 PM
Most punchable face in Congress?

-Matt Gaetz
-Ted Cruz
-Trey Gowdy
-Lindsey Graham
Rand Paul has the most breakable ribs in Congress
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 06, 2020, 10:35:52 PM
Most punchable face in Congress?

-Matt Gaetz
-Ted Cruz
-Trey Gowdy
-Lindsey Graham


Mitch. Always Mitch.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 06, 2020, 10:36:58 PM
Mitch. Always Mitch.
I wouldn't touch his face it's disgusting
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 06, 2020, 10:39:30 PM
I wouldn't touch his face it's disgusting

I can see someone being worried about getting caught by his beak but that’s what chain mail is for.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 07, 2020, 06:43:12 AM
Mitch. Always Mitch.
For some reason, his face is more weird than punchable.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 07, 2020, 09:42:29 AM
Matt Gaetz and his stupid head got tha Rona.  Lol.

None of these douches will actually get sick because karma has her hands full with Trump right now.

Edit: He said he has antibodies, not current infection.  This means he had it and may have spread it earlier without knowing.  Even worse.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201107/3e4d5f80039b1e725a6e451af2f9a832.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on November 07, 2020, 10:47:10 AM
James Urbaniak
@JamesUrbaniak

At his Florida home, Bill Mitchell burns a crucifix like Salieri in “Amadeus.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on November 07, 2020, 10:47:39 AM
God
@TheTweetOfGod

You're welcome.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on November 07, 2020, 10:49:35 AM
Seth Rogen
@Sethrogen

They did this excrement on Saturday so we could get fuuuuuuuuuucked up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on November 07, 2020, 10:50:35 AM
Al Franken
@alfranken

And now the gracious concession.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 07, 2020, 10:53:38 AM
Seth Rogen
@Sethrogen

They did this excrement on Saturday so we could get fuuuuuuuuuucked up.
Lol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 07, 2020, 11:14:10 AM
Al Franken
@alfranken

And now the gracious concession.

LMAOOOOOOOO
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 07, 2020, 06:41:11 PM
https://twitter.com/subtleferret/status/1235605502072983553?s=21

https://twitter.com/neekolul/status/1325115035014713350?s=21

Time is a full circle
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 07, 2020, 06:44:46 PM
https://twitter.com/neekolul/status/1325115035014713350?s=21

Time is a full circle

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1VgcxE9Lpw
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 07, 2020, 06:49:28 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X1VgcxE9Lpw

(https://i.ibb.co/VVfW7tH/F5-EBDD79-19-E4-491-D-97-EA-1-BD5-CF15242-A.jpg) (https://ibb.co/Y2H7z3D)
 (https://statewideinventory.org/bmw-0-60-times)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on November 07, 2020, 07:15:18 PM
she's not hot
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 07, 2020, 08:17:11 PM
she's not hot

https://www.tiktok.com/@neekolul?lang=en
https://www.tiktok.com/@neekolul?lang=en
https://www.tiktok.com/@neekolul?lang=en
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 07, 2020, 08:21:24 PM
I googled her and she's 23 so I feel OK stating that d swordz is clearly an idiot who is apparently channeling his inner JFIF.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on November 07, 2020, 08:23:58 PM
she's not hot

She's got an uncanny valley thing going on.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on November 07, 2020, 09:10:33 PM
not saying she's not attractive but how tacky/annoying/thirsty she is makes her not hot to me

and again as i've always stated i am not some JFIF-ian casanova but i have literally gotten with objectively hotter girls than her so maybe that reduces my tolerance for her some

she's attractive okay 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 07, 2020, 09:19:48 PM
she's not hot
Wrong, just objectively wrong
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 07, 2020, 11:45:23 PM
Good read for anyone concerned about the future of the Dem party

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/11/07/us/politics/aoc-biden-progressives.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 07, 2020, 11:56:11 PM
"These folks are pointing toward Republican messaging that they feel killed them, right? But why were you so vulnerable to that attack?

If you’re not door-knocking, if you’re not on the internet, if your main points of reliance are TV and mail, then you’re not running a campaign on all cylinders. I just don’t see how anyone could be making ideological claims when they didn’t run a full-fledged campaign.

Our party isn’t even online, not in a real way that exhibits competence. And so, yeah, they were vulnerable to these messages, because they weren’t even on the mediums where these messages were most potent. Sure, you can point to the message, but they were also sitting ducks. They were sitting ducks.

There’s a reason Barack Obama built an entire national campaign apparatus outside of the Democratic National Committee. And there’s a reason that when he didn’t activate or continue that, we lost House majorities. Because the party — in and of itself — does not have the core competencies, and no amount of money is going to fix that.

If I lost my election, and I went out and I said: “This is moderates’ fault. This is because you didn’t let us have a floor vote on Medicare for all.” And they opened the hood on my campaign, and they found that I only spent $5,000 on TV ads the week before the election? They would laugh. And that’s what they look like right now trying to blame the Movement for Black Lives for their loss."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 09, 2020, 09:42:35 AM
https://twitter.com/donwinslow/status/1325629483894726656?s=21

lmaoooo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on November 09, 2020, 10:20:35 AM
https://twitter.com/donwinslow/status/1325629483894726656?s=21

lmaoooo

i was kinda dumbfounded when i saw those crocodile tears from van jones the other day lmfaooooooooooo

maybe he's a cryer? has he cried before?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 09, 2020, 11:58:41 AM
Esper out
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 09, 2020, 12:47:18 PM
Esper out

Meh. "I'm sorry, I realise in retrospect shouldn't have done that" isn't acceptable from a person in that position.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on November 09, 2020, 01:01:28 PM
I've seen other people mock the crying or say it wasn't genuine.

I watched that live. For me, speaking as a parent of children who aren't 100% caucasian, it was moving and didn't feel scripted. Maybe he exaggerated his outpouring of emotion, but think it was genuine.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 09, 2020, 01:13:21 PM
Will Van be on AOC's gulag list?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 09, 2020, 04:17:38 PM
Will Van be on AOC's gulag list?
conservatives getting angry at things they made up
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 09, 2020, 05:07:59 PM
Bye bitch

https://twitter.com/DineshDSouza/status/1325858411364364288?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on November 09, 2020, 05:08:32 PM
conservatives getting angry at things they made up
The story of MJ's life

Sent from fire adam gase.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 09, 2020, 06:04:46 PM
Trump Elementary Academy should have pretty fair tuition rates.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 10, 2020, 12:45:18 PM
https://www.kxxv.com/hometown/texas/texas-senator-elect-roland-gutierrez-files-bill-to-legalize-marijuana-in-texas
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on November 10, 2020, 01:12:16 PM
(https://i.redd.it/9w9ci87tsdy51.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 10, 2020, 06:23:44 PM
https://twitter.com/traecrowder/status/1326271273626824705?s=09
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 11, 2020, 12:58:21 PM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201111/8d0717077aee544df07528718f3b1899.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 11, 2020, 02:19:25 PM
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/11/civil-war-brewing-inside-proud-boys-as-top-leader-says-hes-done-pretending-he-isnt-a-nazi/amp/?__twitter_impression=true


Nope, no evidence that they are racists.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 11, 2020, 03:09:20 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201111/8d0717077aee544df07528718f3b1899.jpg)

freaking Ned Lamont
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 11, 2020, 04:13:44 PM
https://www.rawstory.com/2020/11/civil-war-brewing-inside-proud-boys-as-top-leader-says-hes-done-pretending-he-isnt-a-nazi/amp/?__twitter_impression=true


Nope, no evidence that they are racists.
shockedpikachu.jpg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 12, 2020, 05:03:52 PM
https://twitter.com/royalpratt/status/1327000860463861760?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 12, 2020, 05:11:11 PM
https://twitter.com/royalpratt/status/1327000860463861760?s=19

Isn't that the things you say in the backrooms and corridors, not in front of the press?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 12, 2020, 05:15:04 PM
Thanks DiFi

https://twitter.com/SenFeinstein/status/1327015043255443463?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 12, 2020, 05:15:51 PM
Isn't that the things you say in the backrooms and corridors, not in front of the press?
To be fair it says "sources said"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 12, 2020, 05:24:28 PM
To be fair it says "sources said"

FFS was I expected to read the actual article as well? Anyway I did, and it sounds like she said it on a video call. Which is also stupid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 12, 2020, 05:49:20 PM
Thanks DiFi

https://twitter.com/SenFeinstein/status/1327015043255443463?s=19

For fucks sake, just do your job
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 12, 2020, 05:54:41 PM
This guy is a freaking treasure.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/john-fetterman-pennsylvania-democrat-1089672/

Elect him to the Senate in 2022.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 12, 2020, 06:15:14 PM
Thanks DiFi

https://twitter.com/SenFeinstein/status/1327015043255443463?s=19
Whew.  Bullet dodged.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 12, 2020, 06:23:19 PM
This guy is a freaking treasure.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/john-fetterman-pennsylvania-democrat-1089672/

Elect him to the Senate in 2022.
I'd rather have him governing PA.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 12, 2020, 08:11:21 PM
Mark Zuckerberg told an all-staff meeting that Steve Bannon has not violated enough policies to be suspended from Facebook. The ex-Trump adviser suggested in a now-removed video that FBI Director Christopher Wray and Dr. Anthony Fauci should be beheaded https://t.co/pDbUtx7ZhM https://t.co/PFf8WlMZmj
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 12, 2020, 08:28:08 PM
FFS was I expected to read the actual article as well? Anyway I did, and it sounds like she said it on a video call. Which is also stupid.
It was in the tweet but yeah agreed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 12, 2020, 08:37:28 PM
This guy is a freaking treasure.

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-features/john-fetterman-pennsylvania-democrat-1089672/

Elect him to the Senate in 2022.
Quote
I ran for the U.S. Senate in the ’15-’16 cycle. I lost because I was just demolished by spending by the DSCC [Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee].

Party leadership smothering a rising star? I am shocked.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 12, 2020, 09:25:29 PM
Dems who voted to confirm at least 1 Trump judge this week:

Brown: 1/2
Carper: 2/2
Coons: 2/2
Cortez Masto: 2/2
Feinstein: 2/2
Hassan: 2/2
Jones: 2/2
Kaine: 2/2
Leahy: 2/2
Manchin: 2/2
Murphy: 2/2
Peters: 1/2
Reed: 1/2
Rosen: 1/2
Shaheen: 1/2
Warner: 2/2
Whitehouse: 1/2
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 13, 2020, 12:38:42 PM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1327299859804729345?s=21

Wait, this bitch got elected?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 13, 2020, 12:41:53 PM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1327299859804729345?s=21

Wait, this bitch got elected?

Is this the QAnon woman?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 13, 2020, 12:46:47 PM
Is this the QAnon woman?

One of them. The other is from Colorado.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 13, 2020, 01:47:59 PM
She's in the special needs wing of Congress.  Just let her color outside the lines on her picture and tell her she's doing a good job.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 13, 2020, 03:53:04 PM
dafuq is this

https://www.thedailybeast.com/billionaire-charles-koch-regrets-his-partisanship?ref=home
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 13, 2020, 04:05:59 PM
dafuq is this

https://www.thedailybeast.com/billionaire-charles-koch-regrets-his-partisanship?ref=home
Guess ge forgot his pills.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 13, 2020, 04:24:43 PM
dafuq is this

https://www.thedailybeast.com/billionaire-charles-koch-regrets-his-partisanship?ref=home
Abolish billionaires
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 13, 2020, 04:28:50 PM
Abolish billionaires

At least Koch, Adelson and Murdoch will probably be dead before the next election, so that's a start.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 13, 2020, 04:30:56 PM
At least Koch, Adelson and Murdoch will probably be dead before the next election, so that's a start.

They will just be propped up after they are dead and continue on like AC/DC as an auto-generated bot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 13, 2020, 04:48:17 PM
https://twitter.com/ofctimallen/status/1327362470868971520?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 14, 2020, 08:31:28 AM
Here's one for the conspiracy theorists to chew on:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1327253991936454663.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 14, 2020, 05:56:10 PM
Here's one for the conspiracy theorists to chew on:

https://threadreaderapp.com/thread/1327253991936454663.html

TIL I don’t know the difference between Ron Paul and Rand Paul

I think I’m fine with that
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 14, 2020, 11:16:14 PM
TIL I don’t know the difference between Ron Paul and Rand Paul

I think I’m fine with that

I don't think there is one but Badger probably has a view on that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MoreCharacters on November 15, 2020, 01:45:13 AM
ron is the guy in the its happening gif, rand is the one who got beat up by his neighbor

hope this helped
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 15, 2020, 03:32:23 AM
You have to love the obvious progression of idiocy this whole social media censorship angle has taken.

From "lol, if you don't like a platforms terms of service, find a different platform" to "THAT PLATFORM IS RACIST" in record time.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 15, 2020, 07:00:13 AM
Rand has pubes on his head.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 15, 2020, 09:28:15 AM
TIL I don’t know the difference between Ron Paul and Rand Paul

I think I’m fine with that
I don't think there is one but Badger probably has a view on that.
Ron Paul thinks you should buy gold and bury it in your backyard, Rand Paul thinks single payer is slavery for doctors.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 15, 2020, 09:33:16 AM
Ron Paul thinks you should buy gold and bury it in your backyard, Rand Paul thinks single payer is slavery for doctors.

Alexandra Paul wishes she had B cups

(https://41z6h24c86pu1h3m6x151ecm-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/alexandra-paul-2-272x352.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 15, 2020, 10:36:02 AM
One shouldve been President in 2012, the other should be President in 2024 (if he didn't have the charisma of a wet fart).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 15, 2020, 12:48:18 PM
Alexandra Paul wishes she had B cups

(https://41z6h24c86pu1h3m6x151ecm-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/alexandra-paul-2-272x352.jpg)

 I'd drink her bathwater.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 15, 2020, 02:47:13 PM
Need a ridiculous armored cop to keep me safe from Anteefers

https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1328050299634855937?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 15, 2020, 02:49:36 PM
Need a ridiculous armored cop to keep me safe from Anteefers

https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1328050299634855937?s=19

She can get the freak out of my city at any point she'd like.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 15, 2020, 02:52:11 PM
Robolesbo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 15, 2020, 02:56:28 PM
Best reply "are those waffle irons?"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 15, 2020, 03:27:25 PM
She posted some bullshit yesterday or the day before complaining about having to workout in her hotel room.

The Trump Hotel's gym is open most of the day.

There are multiple gyms around the hotel that are open, including a couple of her workout cult gyms.

She's a lying sack of excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 15, 2020, 03:28:17 PM
Hilarious. Reminds me of that absolute freaking wingnut RevisOfNazareth and whatever else he called himself on TGG who loved him some good old Republican freedom guns, he loved to pontificate about how living in a big city had danger around every corner and it was impossible to guarantee your safety unless you were carrying at all times. Turns out he's never actually lived in a city and was actually from some podunk town, and that those of us who have spent most of our lives living in actual big cities had somehow managed to completely avoid being mugged, raped or murdered despite not at any point equipping ourselves with military grade hardware.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 15, 2020, 04:19:48 PM
Neat!

If the two Georgia seats go to the Democrats, the Senate will be split 50-50, but the Democratic half will represent 41,549,808 more people than the Republican half.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 15, 2020, 08:01:09 PM
Neat!

If the two Georgia seats go to the Democrats, the Senate will be split 50-50, but the Democratic half will represent 41,549,808 more people than the Republican half.

I would simply move to North Dakota where my vote would count more
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 15, 2020, 08:27:43 PM
I would simply move to North Dakota where my vote would count more
Nobody moves to North Dakota on purpose
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 15, 2020, 08:45:20 PM
Nobody moves to North Dakota on purpose


I had a sailor from ND who actually had some great stories about his friend being a park ranger in the area.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 15, 2020, 08:51:28 PM
I had a sailor from ND who actually had some great stories about his friend being a park ranger in the area.

He's lying
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 15, 2020, 09:24:20 PM
Nobody moves to North Dakota on purpose


I would happily go back there. I liked it.

Wouldn't live there though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 15, 2020, 09:26:08 PM
He's lying

Tranq'd a mountain lion from a helo on top of mountain so he could tag it. After he tagged it he had to carry it doen the trail so it wouldn't fall off the mountain when it woke up still drugged. Halfway down he realised it woke up and was staring at him. He chucked it off his shoulders and ran back up the mountain to the helo.

Lying or not, it's a very funny story.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 15, 2020, 09:51:09 PM
Nobody moves to North Dakota on purpose
My wife has cousins there. I'm not sure why. Maybe a military thing?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 16, 2020, 06:37:43 AM
Tranq'd a mountain lion from a helo on top of mountain so he could tag it. After he tagged it he had to carry it doen the trail so it wouldn't fall off the mountain when it woke up still drugged. Halfway down he realised it woke up and was staring at him. He chucked it off his shoulders and ran back up the mountain to the helo.

Lying or not, it's a very funny story.

are you sure it wasn't South Dakota?  I don't recall seeing a mountain in North Dakota.  It's Alexandra Paul flat there.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 16, 2020, 06:38:59 AM
I would happily go back there. I liked it.

Wouldn't live there though.

North Dakota is the Saskatchewan of the USA.  Nobody likes it, there's nothing to see, and it's a bitch to drive through because it's boring AF.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 16, 2020, 07:02:17 AM
are you sure it wasn't South Dakota?  I don't recall seeing a mountain in North Dakota.  It's Alexandra Paul flat there.

There's a slight possibility this is the case.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 16, 2020, 10:33:13 AM
Very cool and not a problem at all.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2020/11/16/arctic-refuge-drilling-trump/

Why do Republican voters hate their children?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 16, 2020, 11:02:41 AM
Very cool and not a problem at all.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/climate-environment/2020/11/16/arctic-refuge-drilling-trump/

Why do Republican voters hate their children?

They can't see past themselves.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 16, 2020, 05:25:09 PM
This is like watching a Super Bowl between the Patriots and the Giants.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3gvng/mitch-mcconnell-just-slammed-trumps-plan-to-pull-out-of-afghanistan?utm_source=reddit.com

I am broadly in favour of a withdrawal of troops from foreign conflict, but it must be done in a way that leaves the country in a better place, not create a vacuum. So Trump is trying to do the right thing in the wrong way and for the wrong reasons, and McConnell is trying to do the wrong thing the right way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on November 18, 2020, 07:17:36 AM
https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/11/17/us-senate-blocks-confirmation-of-trump-fed-nominee-shelton

imagine supporting the party that tried to get this woman as the head of the fed.
the type of person who wants to make the US go back to the gold standard and to stop guaranteeing bank deposits like its like 1920 again.

just imagine being that kind of guy. *shudder*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 19, 2020, 09:45:41 AM
BREAKING: crybaby bitch whining about the mean newspaper ruining his fairy tale instead of publishing more opeds that recommend murdering protesters with the military

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1329197835800154117?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 19, 2020, 03:27:52 PM
This is like watching a Super Bowl between the Patriots and the Giants.

https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3gvng/mitch-mcconnell-just-slammed-trumps-plan-to-pull-out-of-afghanistan?utm_source=reddit.com

I am broadly in favour of a withdrawal of troops from foreign conflict, but it must be done in a way that leaves the country in a better place, not create a vacuum. So Trump is trying to do the right thing in the wrong way and for the wrong reasons, and McConnell is trying to do the wrong thing the right way.

There's a reason why Afghanistan is known as "the graveyard of empires."   Libya vacuum lessons not learned aside, afghan undesirables will always be out of the bag and part of the landscape and imho it's doubtful the Afghan government will have the ability (or willpower) to keep things in check internally esp. after the U.S. splits altogether which brings up the question: just exactly how could one have "done the right thing the 'right way'?"  This is a miffed Trump clearing the table and leaving Biden with an inherited headache - certainly not a 'team' move, but to be expected from a wounded, narcissistic duck. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 19, 2020, 08:12:51 PM
sigh

https://twitter.com/StateDept/status/1329507431630692354?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on November 20, 2020, 09:05:33 AM
anti-zionism is not anti-semitism
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 20, 2020, 02:43:33 PM
https://twitter.com/blaireerskine/status/1329776428678868992?s=21 (https://twitter.com/blaireerskine/status/1329776428678868992?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 20, 2020, 03:07:49 PM
https://twitter.com/blaireerskine/status/1329776428678868992?s=21 (https://twitter.com/blaireerskine/status/1329776428678868992?s=21)
Inshallah
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 20, 2020, 03:12:05 PM
https://twitter.com/blaireerskine/status/1329776428678868992?s=21 (https://twitter.com/blaireerskine/status/1329776428678868992?s=21)

That sounds pretty awesome TBH. Do we still get the taco trucks on every corner as well?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 21, 2020, 08:13:21 PM
https://twitter.com/rachel/status/1330221518731743236?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 22, 2020, 09:07:33 PM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201123/9fd12a3dd53303bebe9839b01f312e94.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 22, 2020, 11:17:04 PM
https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1330227510358007810

Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
@AOC
Does anyone believe Rittenhouse would be released if he were Muslim & did the same thing in a diff context? For people who say “systemic racism doesn’t exist,” this is what it looks like: protection of white supremacy baked deep into our carceral systems.

Law and disorder.
2:12 PM · Nov 21, 2020·Twitter for iPhone
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 24, 2020, 10:28:32 AM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sfchronicle.com/crime/amp/In-a-first-for-San-Francisco-DA-Chesa-Boudin-15748619.php (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.sfchronicle.com/crime/amp/In-a-first-for-San-Francisco-DA-Chesa-Boudin-15748619.php)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on November 25, 2020, 08:13:12 AM
parler got hacked hahahahaha

plz release all the excrement, please
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 25, 2020, 08:32:21 AM
parler got hacked hahahahaha

plz release all the excrement, please

Unfortunately, it seems that may not be 100% true.  The owner of Parler said it wasn't hacked.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on November 25, 2020, 08:33:27 AM
Unfortunately, it seems that may not be 100% true.  The owner of Parler said it wasn't hacked.
Dan bongino, bastion of truth.

Sent from fire adam gase.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 25, 2020, 08:37:41 AM
Unfortunately, it seems that may not be 100% true.  The owner of Parler said it wasn't hacked.

Well. If you expose your server credentials on a publicly accessible page then he's technically correct, it's not hacking.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 25, 2020, 09:06:51 AM
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/parler-hack-claims-are-fake-ceo-says-they-are-just-obsessed-with-us/ar-BB1bliTc?li=BB141NW3
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on November 25, 2020, 09:17:05 AM
twitter speculation (i know) is the shared image was from july, but that the passwords were still available in plaintext and were shared passwords amongst other aspects of the business.

i guess until we start seeing some more proof or leaks, its all just nothing.



fwiw, i dont care if john matze says it or not, the dudes a lying scumbag and a scammer. nothing he says is trustworthy.

also, parler is a cesspool and will still censor people so lol
“Parler may remove any content and terminate your access to the Services at any time and for any reason or no reason … Parler is free to remove content and terminate your access to the Services even where the Guidelines have been followed.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 25, 2020, 09:26:24 AM
twitter speculation (i know) is the shared image was from july, but that the passwords were still available in plaintext and were shared passwords amongst other aspects of the business.

i guess until we start seeing some more proof or leaks, its all just nothing.



fwiw, i dont care if john matze says it or not, the dudes a lying scumbag and a scammer. nothing he says is trustworthy.

also, parler is a cesspool and will still censor people so lol
“Parler may remove any content and terminate your access to the Services at any time and for any reason or no reason … Parler is free to remove content and terminate your access to the Services even where the Guidelines have been followed.”
Oh it's funny, don't get me wrong.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 25, 2020, 10:09:56 AM
https://www.newsweek.com/newsmax-chris-ruddy-election-fraud-interview-1550105

So we've gone from pretend news networks pissing down people's backs and telling them that it's raining, and those people believing them, to networks pissing down people's backs and telling them that they're pissing down their backs, and those people choosing to believe it's raining anyway.

At what point do you have no choice but to disenfranchise a certain section of voters on the basis of them not having the mental capacity to make a reasoned decision?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on November 25, 2020, 10:12:15 AM
https://www.newsweek.com/newsmax-chris-ruddy-election-fraud-interview-1550105

At what point do you have no choice but to disenfranchise a certain section of voters on the basis of them not having the mental capacity to make a reasoned decision?

this is what i was referring to when i said that people seem dumber than ever
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 27, 2020, 05:47:35 PM
https://www.bostonglobe.com/2020/11/27/opinion/rich-donors-dont-make-great-ambassadors/

F U Woody
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 30, 2020, 04:42:54 PM
Stupid or liar?

https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1333531813512404995?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 30, 2020, 09:50:34 PM
Stupid or liar?

https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1333531813512404995?s=19

Can't it be both?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 01, 2020, 06:55:49 AM
Can't it be both?
It actually would be a completely valid observation without sentences 3 and 5.

"Let me explain this to you. Corporate liberals are woke capitalists. They sell out working Americans and sneer at them at the same time."

Of course it would still be omitting that Rs are the same minus the woke part.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 01, 2020, 07:14:14 AM
It actually would be a completely valid observation without sentences 3 and 5.

"Let me explain this to you. Corporate liberals are woke capitalists. They sell out working Americans and sneer at them at the same time."

Of course it would still be omitting that Rs are the same minus the woke part.

I meant that he was stupid and lying but yeah I guess that also works.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 01, 2020, 06:50:52 PM
https://twitter.com/Ilhan/status/1333532943336284161?s=19 (https://twitter.com/Ilhan/status/1333532943336284161?s=19)

I would love for this to pass.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 01, 2020, 07:13:16 PM
https://twitter.com/Ilhan/status/1333532943336284161?s=19 (https://twitter.com/Ilhan/status/1333532943336284161?s=19)

I would love for this to pass.
Cement milkshake for anyone who disagrees
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 04, 2020, 01:04:37 PM
https://twitter.com/jstein_wapo/status/1334894822470070277?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 04, 2020, 01:25:19 PM
https://twitter.com/kallllisti/status/1334513865778978823?s=21

https://twitter.com/kallllisti/status/1334914366924189699?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 08, 2020, 09:53:22 AM
You can remove 5 members of US Congress.  Go.

-Mitch McConnell
-Matt Gaetz
-Ted Cruz
-Jim Jordan
-Lindsey Graham

Honorable mention- Rand Paul
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 09, 2020, 04:23:23 PM

Fang like bang Dem dicks

https://www.politico.com/news/2020/12/08/swalwell-trump-criticism-spy-story-443845


 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 09, 2020, 10:57:56 PM
https://twitter.com/NewYorker/status/1336877322784419842?s=19

https://twitter.com/EmmaVigeland/status/1336893475636342784?s=19

The following people endorsed Feinstein's re-election in 2018:

Former Executive Branch officials

Barack Obama, 44th President of the United States

Joe Biden, 47th Vice President of the United States

U.S. Senators

Barbara Boxer, former U.S. Senator (D-CA)

Kamala Harris, U.S. Senator (D-CA)

U.S. Representatives

Pete Aguilar, U.S. Representative (D-CA-31)

Karen Bass, U.S. Representative (D-CA-37)

Ami Bera, U.S. Representative (D-CA-7)

Julia Brownley, U.S. Representative (D-CA-26)

Judy Chu, U.S. Representative (D-CA-27)

Salud Carbajal, U.S. Representative (D-CA-24)

Jim Costa, U.S. Representative (D-CA-16)

Susan Davis, U.S. Representative (D-CA-53)

Mark DeSaulnier, U.S. Representative (D-CA-11)

John Garamendi, U.S. Representative (D-CA-3)

Ted Lieu, U.S. Representative (D-CA-33)

Alan Lowenthal, U.S. Representative (D-CA-47)

Doris Matsui, U.S. Representative (D-CA-6)

Grace Napolitano, U.S. Representative (D-CA-32)

Doug Ose, former U.S. Representative and former gubernatorial candidate in 2018 (R-CA)

Jimmy Panetta, U.S. Representative (D-CA-20)

Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader and U.S. Representative (D-CA-12)

Scott Peters, U.S. Representative (D-CA-52)

Raul Ruiz, U.S. Representative (D-CA-36)

Adam Schiff, U.S. Representative (D-CA-28)

Brad Sherman, U. S. Representative (D-CA-30)

Jackie Speier, U.S. Representative (D-CA-14)

Eric Swalwell, U.S. Representative (D-CA-15)

Mark Takano, U.S. Representative (D-CA-41)

Mike Thompson, U.S. Representative (D-CA-5)

Norma Torres, U.S. Representative (D-CA-35)

Juan Vargas, U.S. Representative (D-CA-51)

Maxine Waters, U.S. Representative (D-CA-43)

State-level officials

Jerry Brown, Governor of California

Gavin Newsom, Lieutenant Governor of California

Alex Padilla, California Secretary of State

Cristina Garcia, California State Assemblymember (D-58)

Susan Talamantes Eggman, California State Assemblymember (D-13)

Jacqui Irwin, California State Assemblymember (D-44)

Anthony Rendon, California State Assemblyman and speaker of the Assembly (D-63)

Blanca E. Rubio, California State Assemblymember (D-48)

Cecilia Aguiar-Curry, California State Assemblymember (D-4)

Anna Caballero, California State Assemblymember (D-30)

Local-level officials

Kathryn Barger, member of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors

Eric Garcetti, Mayor of Los Angeles

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on December 10, 2020, 07:04:28 AM
We should Logan's Run all politicians on their 65th birthday. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on December 10, 2020, 07:06:09 AM
Everyone of them gets a monument bigger than the last somewhere in Nebraska to sate their ego and then we launch them into space. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on December 10, 2020, 07:07:09 AM
INB4 Badger's "So much for the tolerant left."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 10, 2020, 08:59:47 AM
Yeah she’s awful and shouldn’t still be in office. But people shouldn’t be voting her back in either.

I hate it here
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 10, 2020, 09:12:05 AM
Remember when she cursed out some children for asking her to support the Green New Deal? Great times.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 10, 2020, 09:14:47 AM
Remember when she cursed out some children for asking her to support the Green New Deal? Great times.

She probably doesn't.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 10, 2020, 11:08:55 AM
https://twitter.com/NewYorker/status/1336877322784419842?s=19

https://twitter.com/EmmaVigeland/status/1336893475636342784?s=19

The following people endorsed Feinstein's re-election in 2018:

U.S. Representatives

Pete Aguilar, U.S. Representative (D-CA-31)
Karen Bass, U.S. Representative (D-CA-37)
Ami Bera, U.S. Representative (D-CA-7)
Julia Brownley, U.S. Representative (D-CA-26)
Judy Chu, U.S. Representative (D-CA-27)
Salud Carbajal, U.S. Representative (D-CA-24)
Jim Costa, U.S. Representative (D-CA-16)
Susan Davis, U.S. Representative (D-CA-53)
Mark DeSaulnier, U.S. Representative (D-CA-11)
John Garamendi, U.S. Representative (D-CA-3)
Ted Lieu, U.S. Representative (D-CA-33)
Alan Lowenthal, U.S. Representative (D-CA-47)
Doris Matsui, U.S. Representative (D-CA-6)
Grace Napolitano, U.S. Representative (D-CA-32)
Doug Ose, former U.S. Representative and former gubernatorial candidate in 2018 (R-CA)
Jimmy Panetta, U.S. Representative (D-CA-20)
Nancy Pelosi, House Minority Leader and U.S. Representative (D-CA-12)
Scott Peters, U.S. Representative (D-CA-52)
Raul Ruiz, U.S. Representative (D-CA-36)
Adam Schiff, U.S. Representative (D-CA-28)
Brad Sherman, U. S. Representative (D-CA-30)
Jackie Speier, U.S. Representative (D-CA-14)
Eric Swalwell, U.S. Representative (D-CA-15)
Mark Takano, U.S. Representative (D-CA-41)
Mike Thompson, U.S. Representative (D-CA-5)
Norma Torres, U.S. Representative (D-CA-35)
Juan Vargas, U.S. Representative (D-CA-51)
Maxine Waters, U.S. Representative (D-CA-45)

As lockstep warped as this looks, political expediency dictates inclusion on this list least you end up on the wrong side of Nancy Knockers.  They know who butters their bread.  Eric Swalwell to FangFang: how my 'dictate' ?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 10, 2020, 12:41:35 PM
Yeah she’s awful and shouldn’t still be in office. But people shouldn’t be voting her back in either.

I hate it here
I blame the other electeds who endorsed her more than the voters. There was zero chance of a Republican taking the seat, yet the party protected her and this is what we're getting now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 10, 2020, 01:03:42 PM
You can remove 5 members of US Congress.  Go.



Honorable mention- Rand Paul


Lol, we get it, you hate liberty and small government principles.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 10, 2020, 01:35:51 PM
She was very close to getting voted out. With that small margin there's plenty of blame to go around on both the party protecting its incumbent and the populace looking at her and thinking she would offer the best source for leadership out of the field.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 10, 2020, 02:44:00 PM
She was very close to getting voted out. With that small margin there's plenty of blame to go around on both the party protecting its incumbent and the populace looking at her and thinking she would offer the best source for leadership out of the field.
One of the biggest struggles for the progressive insurgency of the party is how reliably the "base" will just vote for the person they heard of, in perpetuity, and getting them to do otherwise is like shifting heaven and earth.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 10, 2020, 03:13:11 PM
One of the biggest struggles for the progressive insurgency of the party is how reliably the "base" will just vote for the person they heard of, in perpetuity, and getting them to do otherwise is like shifting heaven and earth.

Which is why I blame the voters.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 10, 2020, 09:17:04 PM
Which is why I blame the voters.
I mean a excrement ton of manufactured consent goes into making them that way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 11, 2020, 05:37:05 PM
 
  SCOTUS just threw out the Texas lawsuit (or as Trump called it: "the big one").

 

   

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 11, 2020, 05:42:46 PM
 
  SCOTUS just threw out the Texas lawsuit (or as Trump called it: "the big one").

 

   
There will be another big one later.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 14, 2020, 02:03:38 PM
We shouldn't need to be celebrating this, but here we are.

https://lawandcrime.com/supreme-court/even-with-three-trump-appointed-justices-on-the-bench-scotus-declines-to-roll-back-marriage-equality/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 14, 2020, 04:52:32 PM
Barr out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 14, 2020, 04:59:48 PM
Barr out.

Resigned and leaving before Christmas, apparently. Which begs the question, does Trump appoint someone to be AG for a month, or does America just go without one? And if he does appoint one, how much damage can they do in that month?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 14, 2020, 05:03:55 PM
Resigned and leaving before Christmas, apparently. Which begs the question, does Trump appoint someone to be AG for a month, or does America just go without one? And if he does appoint one, how much damage can they do in that month?

They could potentially do a lot of damage, especially to the transition team.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on December 14, 2020, 10:28:23 PM
thats one of the running theories, barr not wanting to totally sabotage biden, so he resigned.

i think its bullshit and hes prob just looking for extra time to pack his belongings and move to an island with no jurisdiction
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 15, 2020, 05:35:10 AM
thats one of the running theories, barr not wanting to totally sabotage biden, so he resigned.

i think its bullshit and hes prob just looking for extra time to pack his belongings and move to an island with no jurisdiction
I think it's simpler.  He didnt want Trump to be able to say he fired him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 15, 2020, 09:09:52 AM
I think it’s even simpler.

CHAI-NUH.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 15, 2020, 09:40:05 AM
There is concern about what Barr's departure means will come next.  As corrupt as he was, even Barr had a few limits. 



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 15, 2020, 04:02:06 PM
There is concern about what Barr's departure means will come next.  As corrupt as he was, even Barr had a few limits.

Bill Barr was an incredible upgrade in terms of integrity over the last four AG's before him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 15, 2020, 04:17:52 PM
Bill Barr was an incredible upgrade in terms of integrity over the last four AG's before him.

Are you including the acting ones in that? If so that seems harsh on Yates.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 15, 2020, 04:50:46 PM
https://twitter.com/AshaRangappa_/status/1274195851309723648?s=19 (https://twitter.com/AshaRangappa_/status/1274195851309723648?s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 15, 2020, 11:06:51 PM
Are you including the acting ones in that? If so that seems harsh on Yates.

I was not and agree that it would be very harsh and rather undue criticism of Yates.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 19, 2020, 11:16:25 AM
Quote
Politicians should wear sponsor jackets just like NASCAR, then we know who owns them. - Robin Williams
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 21, 2020, 09:43:27 PM
https://twitter.com/tracksuitwheel1/status/1341074989286506496?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 21, 2020, 09:47:29 PM
https://twitter.com/tracksuitwheel1/status/1341074989286506496?s=21

She's not wrong. $600 is a significant amount to most working families. It's just not enough to make a difference for a lot of the families who are struggling the most.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 21, 2020, 09:48:35 PM
https://twitter.com/tracksuitwheel1/status/1341074989286506496?s=21

Just out curiosity: who on this board likes Pelosi, tit implant jokes aside?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 22, 2020, 08:51:37 AM
https://twitter.com/besf0rt/status/1341136814736859138?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 22, 2020, 10:44:05 AM

  Significant crumbs
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 22, 2020, 02:34:49 PM
She's not wrong. $600 is a significant amount to most working families. It's just not enough to make a difference for a lot of the families who are struggling the most.

That's all well and good until we keep it in context that this is coming from the same person who said 2,000 bucks or so in tax breaks for a middle class family wasn't a lot of money.

I'm pretty encouraged in these divisive times at just how universally pissed everyone is about this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 22, 2020, 02:58:26 PM
That's all well and good until we keep it in context that this is coming from the same person who said 2,000 bucks or so in tax breaks for a middle class family wasn't a lot of money.

That's not the same context though, is it? If someone wants to give me two grand I'll happily take it, but it's not going to make any kind of difference to my life. For plenty of others, especially right now, that's the difference between making rent and not.

I think the question about who should be getting what tax breaks is different to who should be getting what direct payments as a pandemic emergency measure.

I'm pretty encouraged in these divisive times at just how universally pissed everyone is about this.

For a variety of different reasons, I presume.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 22, 2020, 03:01:30 PM
That's not the same context though, is it? If someone wants to give me two grand I'll happily take it, but it's not going to make any kind of difference to my life. For plenty of others, especially right now, that's the difference between making rent and not.

I think the question about who should be getting what tax breaks is different to who should be getting what direct payments as a pandemic emergency measure.

For a variety of different reasons, I presume.

They're not as unrelated as you think considering the allotment of money in this legislation.

FWIW, if I was Trump I've veto it for a whole host of reasons even though it'd be largely symbolic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 22, 2020, 03:50:17 PM
Dunno about you guys but I'm gonna save a small fortune on my racehorse tax deduction.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 23, 2020, 02:14:20 AM
Dunno about you guys but I'm gonna save a small fortune on my racehorse tax deduction.

It’s a fun way to minimize the very real effect Trumps cuts had for 80 percent of American families. Not all own racehorses or are millionaires.


But really I only came here to say; Amy Klobuchar is a disgustingly rancid queynte who should’ve been forced to resign in disgrace for failing to prosecute Chauvin in her time as AG but of course gets the protection legacy media affords these establishment careerist pieces of lowlife excrement.

For context, she was on some dudes show tonight talking about how a Trump veto in an attempt to expand the stimulus check to 2k is “an attack on American families.”

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 23, 2020, 06:42:04 AM


It’s a fun way to minimize the very real effect Trumps cuts had for 80 percent of American families. Not all own racehorses or are millionaires.

They could have very easily just helped the 80% without the other stuff.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 23, 2020, 09:10:46 AM
The issue isn't wanting to make the stimulus checks bigger, that's fine. It's the timing.  I don't think there's any reasonable way to get that done before unemployment aid expires in a few days, and the eviction moratorium a few days after that.

If Trump was going to veto because the checks are too small, why not say it 2 weeks ago?  All he said was that he wanted bigger checks, but nothing about vetoing a bill because of it. 

EDIT:  It is a veto-proof bill, so he may not have a lot of say, and he never said the word veto, so I'm just an idiot reading the news too fast.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 23, 2020, 09:32:15 AM


The issue isn't wanting to make the stimulus checks bigger, that's fine. It's the timing.  I don't think there's any reasonable way to get that done before unemployment aid expires in a few days, and the eviction moratorium a few days after that.

Not to mention looming government shutdown after 12/28
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 26, 2020, 10:18:09 PM
https://twitter.com/KrangTNelson/status/1343045963980689408?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 27, 2020, 07:41:28 PM
Trump signed the bill, so all the posturing was apparently just that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 28, 2020, 08:20:59 PM
Sanders trying to force the Senate to vote on the $2000 stimulus payments

https://twitter.com/ylanmui/status/1343719232576618496?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 28, 2020, 08:23:33 PM
I don't think they can get 20 Republican senators to vote for $2000.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 28, 2020, 08:29:38 PM
Sanders trying to force the Senate to vote on the $2000 stimulus payments

https://twitter.com/ylanmui/status/1343719232576618496?s=19

House passed it, sadly the Senate will likely be a POS.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 28, 2020, 08:31:01 PM
Seems like Trump has really put the Republican senators in a difficult position. If they refuse to vote, or agree to vote and then vote it down, they're setting themselves against Trump and the American public. If they vote to approve it, they're demonstrating once again that they'd rather kowtow to MAGAworld than their traditional "gubmint spending bad" base.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 28, 2020, 08:52:52 PM
Seems like Trump has really put the Republican senators in a difficult position. If they refuse to vote, or agree to vote and then vote it down, they're setting themselves against Trump and the American public. If they vote to approve it, they're demonstrating once again that they'd rather kowtow to MAGAworld than their traditional "gubmint spending bad" base.
The base will have to decide what's more important to them, deference to Deals Daddy or perpetually crushing the poor.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 28, 2020, 09:03:49 PM
Goodbye to this bitch

https://twitter.com/matthewstoller/status/1343748153317666816?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on December 29, 2020, 01:11:02 PM
https://www.axios.com/mcconnell-blocks-stimulus-checks-db1d9bc2-0eae-44b6-871f-8df37ca66634.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic&utm_content=1100


McConnell blocks Democrats' request to hold vote on $2,000 stimulus checks



take your $600 and go freak yourselves, america. - mitch mcconell , american patriot
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on December 29, 2020, 01:15:50 PM
interesting strategy tho

theyre campaigning in georgia on the line that they need to control the senate in order to protect georgians. loeffler and purdue both said this morning they support the $2000(likely after being told there would be no vote on it).

so now they can say they supported the money, but never were able to vote on it. the dems will jump on that and say why should you control the senate when you are refusing to help these people and are going against trumps wishes? and that they "supported" it right before it was denied a vote?

its insanity, hopefully georgian voters see through that bullshit and vote blue.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 29, 2020, 02:26:04 PM
https://www.axios.com/mcconnell-blocks-stimulus-checks-db1d9bc2-0eae-44b6-871f-8df37ca66634.html?utm_source=twitter&utm_medium=social&utm_campaign=organic&utm_content=1100


McConnell blocks Democrats' request to hold vote on $2,000 stimulus checks



take your $600 and go freak yourselves, america. - mitch mcconell , american patriot
Sanders et al are still blocking a vote on defense spending until the Senate takes a vote on the $2000
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 30, 2020, 07:14:52 AM
Man, Turtle is ruthless.  He's going to combine the $2000 check vote with the sec. 230 repeal and voter fraud commission votes so no one will vote for any of it. 

He found a way to freak over Trump and the democrats at the same time.  Turtle don't care.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201230/f0f1bf91e7569d1e09cc8a14eb9f73ed.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 30, 2020, 07:41:09 AM
Man, Turtle is ruthless.  He's going to combine the $2000 check vote with the sec. 230 repeal and voter fraud commission votes so no one will vote for any of it. 

He found a way to freak over Trump and the democrats at the same time.  Turtle don't care.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20201230/f0f1bf91e7569d1e09cc8a14eb9f73ed.gif)

Or, he'll get a majority of Senate Republicans. This bill will fail because of Democrats, which of course would then put them in position of being the ones that denied a direct 2,000 payment to people who need it most. That narrative won't catch fire in the mainstream of course, as it stands CNN is already idiotically calling these provisions a "poison pill."

When House Democrats want to attach 3 trillion in spending to a bill in which people would've received a 1200 direct payment, that's all well and good, but these conditions are 'poison pills."

It's the same logic that goes into blaming Trump for waiting on signing a 900 billion dollar package when he had a 1.8 trillion dollar proposal on the table that went ignored out of purely electoral politics for months.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 30, 2020, 07:43:57 AM
He really hates being called Moscow Mitch.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 30, 2020, 08:10:29 AM
He really hates being called Moscow Mitch.
Omg epic cheeto drumpf pwned
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 30, 2020, 09:10:26 AM
Both sides got greedy and fucked themselves over.  Pigs get slaughtered.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 30, 2020, 09:13:56 AM
I still don't understand why Trump wants to repeal 230. The first thing that will happen is that he'll get removed from every major platform.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 30, 2020, 09:38:43 AM
I still don't understand why Trump wants to repeal 230. The first thing that will happen is that he'll get removed from every major platform.
He'd rather freak over everyone than having any one have an advantage over him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 30, 2020, 10:50:01 AM
Both sides got greedy and fucked themselves over.  Pigs get slaughtered.

Commie.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 30, 2020, 01:15:19 PM
Funny how people are talking about sedition, like anyone in Congress would ever get convicted of that.  Similar with the Hatch Act.  No one has the nutsack to enforce sedition laws in modern America.  If it hasn't come into play this year, it never will. 

Hatch Act is pointless because it has no teeth.  It's like a warning for a speeding ticket.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 31, 2020, 08:57:56 AM
Quote
The day began with Sen. Bernie Sanders following through on his promise to deny unanimous consent for the Senate to advance a $740 billion defense authorization bill, until Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell allows an up-or-down vote on legislation that would send $2,000 survival checks to individuals making less than $75,000 and couples making less than $150,000. 

Sanders’ move forced McConnell to ask the Senate to pass a formal motion to proceed on the defense bill, which would let Republicans move forward on the Pentagon priority without a vote on the $2,000 checks. The motion created the moment in which Democrats could have stood their ground and cornered the GOP leader.

Instead, as Republicans saber rattled about the need to pass the defense bill, 41 Democrats obediently voted with McConnell, allowing him to move the defense bill forward without a vote on the checks. That included “yes” votes from Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and vice-president elect Kamala Harris, the lead sponsor on a bill to give Americans monthly $2,000 checks during the pandemic. One day before her vote to help McConnell, Harris had called on the Republican leader to hold a vote on her legislation. 

Only six members of the Senate Democratic Caucus mustered the courage to vote against McConnell’s maneuver — Sanders, Elizabeth Warren, Chris Van Hollen, Jeff Merkley, Ed Markey and Ron Wyden. Democratic senators in fact provided the majority of the votes for the measure that lets the defense bill proceed without a vote on the $2,000 checks.

It was called a motion to proceed, but it really was a motion demanding Democrats concede — and they instantly obliged.

It Didn’t Have To Go This Way

Had most Senate Democrats voted against that motion, they might have had a chance to deny McConnell and stall the process — after all, five Republicans also voted against the measure, including Missouri’s Josh Hawley, who has pushed the survival checks with Sanders. 

-Sirota
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 31, 2020, 09:03:03 AM
Perdue and Loeffler did not vote on the motion, getting off the hook for now, so far it appears they'll be able to feign support for the $2K without having to actually put their name to it.

There's still some leverage to force a vote but much less now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on December 31, 2020, 12:02:51 PM
Bunch of cunts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 31, 2020, 01:43:50 PM
Bunch of cunts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 02, 2021, 02:43:11 PM
This country is a dumpster fire right now. Slowest 3 weeks ever.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 03, 2021, 12:54:15 PM
Mask nazis!

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1345782585927098370?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 03, 2021, 01:07:58 PM
Gohmert referred to the Court dismissing his lawsuit as a call to violence.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 03, 2021, 01:46:18 PM
https://twitter.com/keithedwards/status/1345796238722129923

WaPo released audio of Trump trying to blackmail Georgias SoS to overturn the results

“It’s gonna be costly to you.”

is it donald? is it?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 03, 2021, 03:19:57 PM
Full phone call between Trump and Georgia election officials.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-transcript-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/2768e0cc-4ddd-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-transcript-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/2768e0cc-4ddd-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 03, 2021, 03:23:46 PM
Full phone call between Trump and Georgia election officials.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-transcript-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/2768e0cc-4ddd-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/trump-raffensperger-call-transcript-georgia-vote/2021/01/03/2768e0cc-4ddd-11eb-83e3-322644d82356_story.html)
Is this one different than the one above?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 03, 2021, 03:24:33 PM
Is this one different than the one above?

It includes the other 58 minutes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 03, 2021, 03:25:05 PM
It includes the other 58 minutes.
Ahh ok
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 03, 2021, 05:01:18 PM
Pelosis funbags re-elected to Titty of the house
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 03, 2021, 05:03:50 PM
Pelosis funbags re-elected to Titty of the house
..(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210103/381497e78261d5a1c4bbf1db60ef2d31.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 03, 2021, 05:42:54 PM
https://twitter.com/thegoodliars/status/1345503693748232198?s=21 (https://twitter.com/thegoodliars/status/1345503693748232198?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 03, 2021, 06:37:55 PM
https://twitter.com/thegoodliars/status/1345503693748232198?s=21 (https://twitter.com/thegoodliars/status/1345503693748232198?s=21)

excrement take is excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 03, 2021, 07:38:54 PM
Pelosis funbags re-elected to Titty of the house

No longer her funbags but 'them' funbags:

https://www.businessinsider.com/proposal-eliminate-gendered-language-house-of-representatives-2021-1

The House of Representatives on Sunday is set to vote on a series of changes that would eliminate all gendered words like "mother," "father," "he," and "she" from its rules.

In addition to these specific words, the proposal outlines dozens of other shifts to gender-neutral language, as well as the establishment of an "Office of Diversity and Inclusion."

The proposal was put forth by House Speaker Nancy Pelosi and Rules Committee Chair James McGovern. In a press release, McGovern said the proposal "promotes inclusion and diversity" and is a way to "honor all gender identities by changing pronouns and familial relationships in the House rules to be gender-neutral."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 03, 2021, 07:45:15 PM
Excellent. It's relatively meaningless but will serve to irritate people stupid enough to be irritated by such things.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 03, 2021, 07:52:27 PM
Excellent. It's relatively meaningless but will serve to irritate people stupid enough to be irritated by such things.

Somewhere J. K. Rowling has an opinion on how this belittles women.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 03, 2021, 08:04:46 PM
Excellent. It's relatively meaningless but will serve to irritate people stupid enough to be irritated by such things.

  Yeah I guess,  I was just going for the cheap joke. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 05, 2021, 08:25:21 AM
I just can't believe the Democrats will win both seats in Georgia.  Maybe 1 if they are lucky.  It's still Georgia and they aren't voting for or against Trump directly.  I can't believe the Democrats can turn out enough people who didn't vote last time to overcome the deficit they had. I don't believe a significant enough number of people will not vote because they think the vote is rigged.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 05, 2021, 08:25:48 AM
Unrelated, I know Pence will bite his tongue and read the certified results tomorrow.  I am curious what would happen if he decided not to recognize the results.  Obviously it isn't legal and wouldn't work, yada yada yada, and I know it won't happen, but what would happen immediately, in that moment, not what would happen in the end (I know that)?  Would someone else come in and certify it?  Would Pence be removed?  Would the Senate explode in flames and titty dancers come out and grind Mitch McConnell? I've seen lots of people just say it would be illegal and leave it at that, but I haven't read anywhere what actually happens at that moment if Pence didn't do his ceremonial job.  Just curious.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 05, 2021, 09:00:54 AM
I just can't believe the Democrats will win both seats in Georgia.  Maybe 1 if they are lucky.  It's still Georgia and they aren't voting for or against Trump directly.  I can't believe the Democrats can turn out enough people who didn't vote last time to overcome the deficit they had. I don't believe a significant enough number of people will not vote because they think the vote is rigged.
Warnock wins, Ossoff loses, shitlibs go mask off and yell at black people for not voting the right way
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 05, 2021, 08:30:28 PM
So there's a short fuse press conference just announced by the Georgia Secretary of State.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 05, 2021, 08:49:40 PM
pennsylvania republicans are giving us a preview of things to come by refusing to acknowledge his victory because his opponent has refused to concede.

im so glad i dont live in one of these shitholes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 05, 2021, 08:50:55 PM
"I can tell you, Sean, any senator or any congressmen -- meaning on this side -- that does not fight tomorrow, I'm telling you, their political career is over, because the MAGA movement is going nowhere ... they will get primaried" -- Eric Trump

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1346646357071835141


is that so, eric? imagine being in the trump freaking party of all things, good god
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 05, 2021, 09:21:15 PM
I think Warnock might win.  I don't know about Ossoff. Probably not.  Still too close.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 05, 2021, 09:29:47 PM
I think Warnock might win.  I don't know about Ossoff. Probably not.  Still too close.

dekalb and cobb are gonna swing heavy blue, theres a good chance they both win.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 05, 2021, 09:31:03 PM
donald seems to think so, too


Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
2m
Looks like they are setting up a big “voter dump” against the Republican candidates. Waiting to see how many votes they need?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 05, 2021, 09:31:43 PM
dekalb and cobb are gonna swing heavy blue, theres a good chance they both win.

It'll be interesting to say the least. I can't wait to see what Trump's speech to the brownshirts tomorrow consists of if both Warnock and Ossoff win their seats.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 05, 2021, 09:34:44 PM
new york times has warnock wins by 2 and osoff wins by 1
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 05, 2021, 09:35:21 PM
Nytimes has Warncok quite likely to win and leaning towards Ossoff.  I'll believe it when I see it, but never thought it would be this close.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 05, 2021, 09:48:18 PM
Man, if Ossoff wins Mitch is gonna have a stroke because Trump fucked him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 05, 2021, 10:05:40 PM
@WindsorMann
Kelly Loeffler and David Perdue are buying lots of stocks in Warnock and Ossoff Inc.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 05, 2021, 10:13:25 PM
Didn't see this coming.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 05, 2021, 10:24:37 PM
its not over yet, but the remaining 5% is in heavy dem areas. holy shittttt

95% in

@FiveThirtyEight
With that big vote dump from DeKalb county, Warnock has now taken a 32,013-vote lead, and Perdue’s lead has been cut to just 3,121 votes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 05, 2021, 10:29:41 PM
if the dems win this stacey abrams should be made president instead because shes the only one in that party with her excrement together enough to lead anything
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 05, 2021, 10:31:00 PM
warnock defeats loeffler, making her an incumbent loser that never won an election


ossof should win, too


@Nate_Cohn
But the remaining early in-person votes in DeKalb, alone, will give Ossoff the kind of lead that Biden had in the final count, and there's a lot more for him beyond that. So there may not be a call there tonight, but it's not serious doubt
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 05, 2021, 10:32:43 PM
In Georgia, a campaign can request a recount if the margin is within 0.5 percentage points. https://t.co/Eu6TGE9JvK

Will happen, but not worried.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 05, 2021, 10:39:55 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErBcH03W4AAi4ES?format=png&name=small)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 05, 2021, 10:48:32 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErBcH03W4AAi4ES?format=png&name=small)
I'm gonna push Ossoff over the top with this old tweet

https://twitter.com/ossoff/status/263034739819175936?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 05, 2021, 10:48:41 PM
if the dems win this stacey abrams should be made president instead because shes the only one in that party with her excrement together enough to lead anything

DNC Chair. She understands voters and knows how to win elections.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 05, 2021, 10:48:45 PM
Nyt says about 176k votes left, expects Ossoff to win about 64% of them.  Would roughly have him win by 40K votes.  excrement's over.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 05, 2021, 10:53:17 PM
Let's gooo

https://twitter.com/ossoff/status/459383750632431616?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 05, 2021, 10:57:49 PM
..(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/4583a48fde1d3fe8a369b107530d3848.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 05, 2021, 11:09:53 PM
STOP THE COUNT!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 05, 2021, 11:31:20 PM
Looks like this might not be over yet:

https://twitter.com/ossoff/status/309421895445524480?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 05, 2021, 11:39:10 PM
Looks like this might not be over yet:

https://twitter.com/ossoff/status/309421895445524480?s=19

LMAOOOO! (https://twitter.com/Minoru79/status/1346669579578335234?s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 05, 2021, 11:44:15 PM
senate minority leader mitch mcconnel. sounds nice.


lost it over 1400 bucks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 05, 2021, 11:45:57 PM
howardfineman
@howardfineman
·
9m
Assuming the results we now expect, Wednesday Jan. 6, 2021 will be the worst day of #MitchMcConnell’s long and fetid career.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 05:08:55 AM
senate minority leader mitch mcconnel. sounds nice.


lost it over 1400 bucks
He lost it because of Cheeto
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 05:51:12 AM
Alright, let's move those DC statehood and marijuana legalization votes up.l
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 07:05:23 AM
Watching videos of the Bitch Boys and the other Trumpsters turn on the cops in DC because the cops won't let them tear up signs on black churches anymore and don't automatically side against the random black people they start accosting in the streets has been an interesting turn of events.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 06, 2021, 07:14:05 AM
Blocking stimulus checks in a pandemic a week before a special election was a hell of a strategy, glad that worked out for them
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 07:35:54 AM
Watching videos of the Bitch Boys and the other Trumpsters turn on the cops in DC because the cops won't let them tear up signs on black churches anymore and don't automatically side against the random black people they start accosting in the streets has been an interesting turn of events.

Don't you know, you're only allowed to burn inner cities to the ground and set fire to churches if you're a leftist shitbag

This disparity of treatment considering what went down all summer is noticed and will be horrible for this country.

Which is to say nothing about the blatant falsehood of the rest of this comment. Accosting random black people in the street. Ok retard.

Blocking stimulus checks in a pandemic a week before a special election was a hell of a strategy, glad that worked out for them

As opposed to holding relief up for two months by refusing to meet with the President when he has a 1.8 trillion dollar proposal on the table.

Republicans "held up relief" takes the same lack of thinking and logic as the thinking that goes into people actually believing Cuomo did a better job with this pandemic then De Santis.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 07:48:45 AM
https://twitter.com/BrianDMcBride/status/1346664172663296005?s=20 (https://twitter.com/BrianDMcBride/status/1346664172663296005?s=20)

https://twitter.com/zackbornstein/status/1346652097580679168?s=21 (https://twitter.com/zackbornstein/status/1346652097580679168?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 07:51:58 AM
https://twitter.com/BrianDMcBride/status/1346664172663296005?s=20 (https://twitter.com/BrianDMcBride/status/1346664172663296005?s=20)

LMAO the pathetic fanboying from some in this place for this corrupt queynte is going to be hilarious over the next two years until they finally get that old codger out of the way and she's President.


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 07:57:34 AM
LMAO the pathetic fanboying from some in this place for this corrupt queynte is going to be hilarious over the next two years until they finally get that old codger out of the way and she's President.
I'm speaking
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 08:42:08 AM
I'm really enjoying Donald's twitter feed today, and seeing the odd buttboy still claiming there's fraud and whatnot or that pence will not certify the results today.

It's quite cathartic.

Johnny English is a jerk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on January 06, 2021, 08:46:32 AM
AOC is so perfect and beautiful, and on top of that she's a latina from the bronx. i wish she was my girl
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 08:53:55 AM
AOC is so perfect and beautiful, and on top of that she's a latina from the bronx. i wish she was my girl

prone bone
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 09:07:13 AM
Seriously, not cool. (https://twitter.com/rsp_dc/status/1346828694120235009?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 09:08:17 AM
https://twitter.com/sarahspain/status/1346693384971431937?s=21 (https://twitter.com/sarahspain/status/1346693384971431937?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 06, 2021, 09:35:43 AM
AOC is so perfect and beautiful, and on top of that she's a latina from the bronx. i wish she was my girl

Bro this is the politics thread r u ok?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 06, 2021, 09:36:19 AM
Don’t search my post history on pelosi titties btw
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on January 06, 2021, 09:36:48 AM
Bro this is the politics thread r u ok?

every time i see her my heart burns bro fvuck am i supposed to do

leave me alone
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 09:41:26 AM
Don’t search my post history on pelosi titties btw

Same here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 06, 2021, 09:50:46 AM
every time i see her my heart burns bro fvuck am i supposed to do

leave me alone

My heart burns when I AOC
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 10:28:15 AM
What's the deal with the people who didn't vote straight D or R on this? Because it appears there's a few thousand people who had a mixed ballot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 10:32:57 AM
What's the deal with the people who didn't vote straight D or R on this? Because it appears there's a few thousand people who had a mixed ballot.

If you look at /r/conservative, there are quite a few people who really hated Loeffler. I would imagine it's more a case of Republican voters who were fine with Perdue but couldn't bring themselves to vote for Loeffler, and possibly people who really liked Warnock but didn't really care one way or the other about Ossoff v Perdue. So my guess is more single candidate voters than mixed tickets.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 10:34:31 AM
My heart burns when I AOC

lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 10:34:58 AM
What's the deal with the people who didn't vote straight D or R on this? Because it appears there's a few thousand people who had a mixed ballot.

Perdue has a family legacy in Georgia politics while Loeffler is a transplant so making the choice for Warnock would have been easier while remaining loyal to a member of Georgia political royalty.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 06, 2021, 10:57:20 AM
https://i.imgur.com/BoL2yNM.gifv (https://i.imgur.com/BoL2yNM.gifv)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 06, 2021, 11:10:22 AM
What's the deal with the people who didn't vote straight D or R on this? Because it appears there's a few thousand people who had a mixed ballot.

Some people don't vote with any coherent strategy in mind, they just put down the person who they like more. Loeffler is uniquely unlikable, Purdue more of a known and liked figure, especially in affluent suburbs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 11:24:47 AM
https://i.imgur.com/BoL2yNM.gifv (https://i.imgur.com/BoL2yNM.gifv)

This is excellent
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 11:34:38 AM
(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.0-9/136391126_10223575635808749_3612507204570327654_n.jpg?_nc_cat=101&ccb=2&_nc_sid=730e14&_nc_ohc=0C9vB3gevZMAX9iRXM1&_nc_ht=scontent-sjc3-1.xx&oh=9aef2fa12f2f2c13b55f798b113badf3&oe=601C74B2)

YungAssTaster
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 12:04:31 PM
Donald is out there at the sadass America rally threatening pence with some "not good stories around him floating around"

So we may get to see pence exposed for liking dudes, which is not at all surprising.

Ya know, if the Trump's plan to expose everyone who didn't help them, that'd be just fine.

Johnny English is a jerk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 12:07:08 PM
You lie in the bed you make.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 12:09:43 PM
Oh baby here we go

https://twitter.com/Acosta/status/1346879930219560963?s=19(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/ab4a4208bf1c2f14b4741379549422ed.jpg)

Johnny English is a jerk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 12:18:52 PM
First objection in, Arizona.

So begins a huge waste of freaking time from a bunch of pathetic traitors (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/6f7fe4c9136aa44c168e04ae56e34775.jpg)

Johnny English is a jerk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 12:28:18 PM
Holy excrement, is Steve Scalise trying to use Trump's phone call as a defense of this nonsense? Woweee

Johnny English is a jerk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 12:30:32 PM
https://twitter.com/always_margot/status/1346578062700400647?s=19

Republican congresswoman Mary Miller just said "Hitler was right"


Holy excrement.

Johnny English is a jerk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 12:32:22 PM
This is chaos. Trumpers are fighting with police, and now they're evacuating several buildings in the area.

Trump is responsible for all of this.

Johnny English is a jerk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 12:35:22 PM
McConnell railing on the morons wasting everyone's time.

This is great, the infighting is gonna be something else.

Johnny English is a jerk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 12:36:44 PM
The police are busy evacuating buildings instead of stopping these people right now (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/b2774b7df5cccb38bb2e8463236e9221.jpg)



There's a bomb threat at the Capitol Hill club.

Johnny English is a jerk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 12:38:59 PM
This is the most patriotic thing Mitch has done in his entire life.

Johnny English is a jerk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on January 06, 2021, 12:46:21 PM
Good for Mitch.

Still, freak Mitch McConnell.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on January 06, 2021, 12:48:06 PM
Mitch knows that the GOP can't mess with the electoral college. If they mess with the electoral college, they might never win an election again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 12:55:31 PM
Ted Cruz dosent understand how the voting process works.

Congress dosent certify the votes, Congress counts the already certified votes.



Johnny English is a jerk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 12:57:44 PM
IATA's signature is hilarious. Like, c'mon dude, I might very well be but this excrement isn't my fault. It looks like you're blaming me for all this nonsense.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 12:58:46 PM
Who is this wailing banshee? If she gets any more high pitched only dogs will be able to hear her. Is she the one who keeps threatening to carry a gun in DC?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:00:34 PM
I'm curious what the Republicans plan on doing for the rest of their objections? Just continue to beg for a second chance?

Johnny English is a jerk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:00:46 PM
IATA's signature is hilarious. Like, c'mon dude, I might very well be but this excrement isn't my fault. It looks like you're blaming me for all this nonsense.
Hahahaha

Johnny English is a jerk, but this isn't his fault
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 01:09:39 PM
https://twitter.com/always_margot/status/1346578062700400647?s=19

Republican congresswoman Mary Miller just said "Hitler was right"


Holy excrement.

Johnny English is a fine young man



They're not even dogwhistling any more, they're just straight up invoking Nazi doctrine.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:24:21 PM
These psychos have breeched the Capitol building. Why aren't the police doing something?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/1faf539dc5653d57f02f64299214a707.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:25:01 PM
https://twitter.com/jazmineulloa/status/1346898566703435779?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on January 06, 2021, 01:25:49 PM
These psychos have breeched the Capitol building. Why aren't the police doing something?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/1faf539dc5653d57f02f64299214a707.jpg)
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErEmfOOW4AU-1p-?format=jpg&name=medium)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:27:42 PM
https://twitter.com/igorbobic/status/1346899437520621568?s=19

Jesus Christ. The Cops are "negotiating", but had no issue blasting a bunch of moms with tear gas and rubber bullets awhile back.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:29:20 PM
Jr is worried about catching an inviting charge from this morning's rant.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/998b1ace69026b028ceafa807919f1bf.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:30:34 PM
Piece of excrement in charge does nothing to stop this, instead opting to give them more fuel

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/564da0e363e0c825f1f0251dd4d661b7.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 01:32:22 PM
If only your law enforcement services had access to any kind of equipment that could be used to quell such an uprising.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:40:16 PM
It's honestly rather surprising that the police are letting these terrorists storm the freaking capital building and have to put the VP and senators on lockdown.

What's it gonna take for them to respond?


Edit
Tear gas has been used in the rotunda and members are being told to use their gas masks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 01:40:21 PM
Holy excrement, is Steve Scalise trying to use Trump's phone call as a defense of this nonsense? Woweee

Johnny English is a jerk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 01:40:51 PM
Lawmakers being told to shelter in place and hide from armed invaders.

I hope you're all sending them thoughts and prayers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 01:40:59 PM
So this is terrorism.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 01:41:35 PM
So this is terrorism.

No, they're white and conservative. This is patriotism.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:41:46 PM
https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1346900255732887556?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:45:56 PM
Guns have been drawn in the chamber. Oh man
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 01:45:59 PM
I feel like bowser called up the national guard for some reason...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:47:51 PM
https://twitter.com/BNONews/status/1346902451950071817?s=19

More fighting the cops from the law and order crowd.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 01:51:00 PM
Lawmakers being told to shelter in place and hide from armed invaders.

I hope you're all sending them thoughts and prayers.
Damn you China!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 01:54:34 PM
There's now a guy in the chamber behind the podium yelling about how Trump won the election.

https://twitter.com/igorbobic/status/1346906369232920576

Pelosi has requested the National Guard move in.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 01:54:50 PM
Trump did this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:55:57 PM
Where are the freaking cops Holy excrement
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/ad215cf5f187c2de7a0f9412f2fdef0b.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 01:56:20 PM
National guard en route to the Capitol building.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:58:01 PM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/f26a9a177c7c1036540390104223be09.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 01:58:14 PM
Pelosi has requested the National Guard move in.

Put these people down
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 01:59:09 PM
Things are about to get very freaking serious. Oh my god.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/be5f7884bad870c1fc8a9af6e9cc852b.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:01:15 PM
National guard en route to the Capitol building.
Maybe not.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/dd80238932ad0f53e8980cb9de88e8a1.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 02:02:06 PM
Things are about to get very freaking serious.

If this were BLM and they were attacking police, we would have several dead bodies right outside the US Capitol right now.

Put them down.  Shoot them in the face with rubber bullets and haul their stupid, redneck asses off to jail. 

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:03:05 PM
National guard en route to the Capitol building.

Apparently not. (https://twitter.com/byaaroncdavis/status/1346908166030766080?s=20)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:04:00 PM
MPD and Capitol police have both killed people for less.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:05:02 PM
This is a coup. These people need to be stopped immediately.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 06, 2021, 02:06:56 PM
Apparently not. (https://twitter.com/byaaroncdavis/status/1346908166030766080?s=20)

Department of Defense leadership was explicitly and abruptly changed by Trump following the election.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:07:26 PM
Gotta stop the uprising to get some sweet pics for Facebook.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/d63f6818f40896624d33561c2ffeb62f.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:07:33 PM
Report of shots fired.  (https://twitter.com/mepfuller/status/1346907098769215491?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 02:07:34 PM
Seems as though the police are outmanned, not failing to do enough.  I'm not gonna judge, tough situation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:08:12 PM
Seems as though the police are outmanned, not failing to do enough.  Im not gonna judge, tough situation.
Well, the solution to that problem was just denied by Trump's DoD.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 02:09:24 PM
Report of shots fired.  (https://twitter.com/mepfuller/status/1346907098769215491?s=21)

Fantastic

This is going to be awful
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:09:50 PM
First person shot.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/c0c0b05c9a1cd6e0933e0fd02be0fc6c.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:09:50 PM
Seems as though the police are outmanned, not failing to do enough.  Im not gonna judge, tough situation.

There were swarms of cops, unmarked federal agents, and national guardsmen over every inch of the city for the BLM protests, but nowhere near that level of force for today with multiple threats. The lack of personnel was an action.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:12:39 PM
Meanwhile in Georgia...(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/925c1a2278d4513ae222319911cc7615.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:14:17 PM
There were swarms of cops, unmarked federal agents, and national guardsmen over every inch of the city for the BLM protests, but nowhere near that level of force for today with multiple threats. The lack of personnel was an action.
.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/0fac8c3cbbd9d134e7d709c3e95d5c87.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 02:15:25 PM
First person shot.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/c0c0b05c9a1cd6e0933e0fd02be0fc6c.jpg)
Fantastic

This is going to be awful
Depends
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:17:12 PM
No call to leave. Pathetic. He's freaking pathetic. (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/58ff17e292f3ba11fa000acba29d486a.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:17:22 PM
Trump has yet to say anything to get these fuckers out of there. 25th amendment. Now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:18:02 PM
.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/e9440bde302023c9057b45e591635338.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 06, 2021, 02:21:24 PM
First person shot.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/c0c0b05c9a1cd6e0933e0fd02be0fc6c.jpg)

NSFW

https://twitter.com/MeetThePress/status/1346912522260066306

Who could have possibly freaking seen this coming? After all, weren't we supposed to believe Republican leadership?

Quote
"What is the downside for humoring him for this little bit of time? No one seriously thinks the results will change," said one senior Republican official. "He went golfing this weekend. It's not like he's plotting how to prevent Joe Biden from taking power on Jan. 20. He's tweeting about filing some lawsuits, those lawsuits will fail, then he'll tweet some more about how the election was stolen, and then he'll leave."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:22:43 PM
Checking in with Republican lawmakers:

Romney: This is Trump’s fault. (https://twitter.com/jmartnyt/status/1346907794830712834?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 02:23:24 PM
So before we overreact here, are we sure that these are actually Trump supporters? I see some people dressed in black, I'm pretty sure that this is an antifa false flag operation designed to make true patriots look bad. Guessing Soros is funding it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:23:30 PM
This freaking player of the pink oboe(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/c2ea2b997d160d47f76e7359d8209558.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:25:00 PM
This freaking player of the pink oboe(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/c2ea2b997d160d47f76e7359d8209558.jpg)

He should go out and talk to them in person.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:25:02 PM
Wowowowow(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/7b9f7ac9820fa3f4823672e0fe8c3764.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 02:27:26 PM
Checking in with Republican lawmakers:

Romney: This is Trump’s fault. (https://twitter.com/jmartnyt/status/1346907794830712834?s=21)

LETS freaking GO, MITT
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:28:12 PM
https://twitter.com/vermontgmg/status/1346914483831267331?s=21 (https://twitter.com/vermontgmg/status/1346914483831267331?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 06, 2021, 02:29:11 PM
He should go out and talk to them in person.

He was literally in front of them this morning screaming that "today is the day American Patriots start taking down names and kicking derriere"

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1346823072612036608
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 02:30:00 PM
https://twitter.com/vermontgmg/status/1346914483831267331?s=21 (https://twitter.com/vermontgmg/status/1346914483831267331?s=21)

There are only two plausible explanations:

1. They didn't think there was any possibility that this could happen

2. They didn't mind if it did

I have to think that Occam's Razor applies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:30:09 PM
National guard was finally approved. Took freaking long enough.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:31:58 PM
Took long enough.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/c0dc2d7f0e0f32250b307f06463a9a26.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:32:51 PM
National guard was finally approved. Took freaking long enough.
Wasn't even trump, Northam is sending the guard and cops in.

Wow
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 02:32:54 PM
Launch the nukes Xi
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 02:33:11 PM
Mostly peaceful protests, with a few bad apples.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 02:34:42 PM
Mostly peaceful protests, with a few bad apples.

LOL. I see what you did there.

Probably antifa activists, right?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:35:15 PM
Pretty telling who was tagged and who wasn't.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/a548a63c236fbb7438b7802839969cf3.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:35:33 PM
LOL. I see what you did there.

Probably antifa activists, right?
They had their hats backwards, so ya know.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 02:35:37 PM
Mostly peaceful protests, with a few bad apples.

PROTECT THE CONFEDERATE STATUES!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:36:14 PM
Imagine warping your brain so hard you think burning store fronts is on par with an act of insurrection.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 02:37:08 PM
Imagine warping your brain so hard you think burning store fronts is on par with an act of insurrection.

LMAO insurrection.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 06, 2021, 02:37:32 PM
Mostly peaceful protests, with a few bad apples.

I like the equivalencies between protesting unarmed civilians being killed by armed government employees and protesting the results of an election in an attempt to overthrow the results.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:38:19 PM
Mostly peaceful protests, with a few bad apples.
Least we've got a clear plan for punishment with these bad apples(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/6c950a1416ac1cacd52e2740f65cf507.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:38:49 PM
LMAO insurrection.



I’m sorry what do you call storming the Capitol building to disrupt an election?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 02:39:08 PM
LMAO insurrection.

What would you call it? Youthful overexuberance?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 06, 2021, 02:39:50 PM
LMAO insurrection.

Honestly curious, what do you think these guys are doing here? Why are they attempting to do traveling from across the country and breaking into the capital building on the day that the federal government is supposed to officially call the election?

https://twitter.com/JoshuaPotash/status/1346904724600188929
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 02:40:58 PM
I like the equivalencies between protesting unarmed civilians being killed by armed government employees and protesting the results of an election in an attempt to overthrow the results.

Yup. That’s all that happened. Protesting unarmed civilians (which in the case of Kenosha isn’t even true) being gunned down by cops. We didn’t have city blocks go up in smoke.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 02:42:13 PM
CNN reporting that staff are asking Trump to put out stronger statements and tell his supporters to leave but he is refusing to do so
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 02:42:16 PM
Yup. That’s all that happened. Protesting unarmed civilians (which in the case of Kenosha isn’t even true) being gunned down by cops. We didn’t have city blocks go up in smoke.
You have a capital building being invaded and destroyed, instead.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 02:43:11 PM
(which in the case of Kenosha isn’t even true)

It's a real shame the police didn't unload on that fatter version of Nick Sandmann
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:43:42 PM
The US Capitol is literally under siege and freak is trying to call it anything other than treason and insurrection.

Ban MJ.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 02:44:56 PM
The US Capitol is literally under siege and freak is trying to call it anything other than treason and insurrection.

Ban MJ.

No, it's perfectly acceptable to have different views on things. I'm not even sure if he's joking.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 02:45:23 PM
LMAO insurrection.

Here's the real question of the day:

Why are you sitting inside the Capitol building with your buddies? 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:46:33 PM
No, it's perfectly acceptable to have different views on things. I'm not even sure if he's joking.

LMAO different view.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 02:46:56 PM
On the plus side, it's going to be harder for some of those GOP congressmen and senators to keep backing Trump after this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 02:47:35 PM
I've learned there are some times in life where you should just shut the freak up.  This is one of those times mj.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 02:49:18 PM
Why is the media continuing to call these people Pro-Trump protesters rather than Anti-Democracy terrorists?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 06, 2021, 02:49:49 PM
Yup. That’s all that happened. Protesting unarmed civilians (which in the case of Kenosha isn’t even true) being gunned down by cops. We didn’t have city blocks go up in smoke.

... yes, indeed, just like all that is happening now is a normal protest and not a poorly organized attempted insurrection. Violent looters coopted protest movements over the summer. Violent insurrectionists are coopting protests now. One is worse.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 02:49:50 PM
Why is the media continuing to call these people Pro-Trump protesters rather than Anti-Democracy terrorists?

Because they are white
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 02:51:17 PM
Woo-wee! One little comment and look at this reaction.

The US Capitol is literally under siege and freak is trying to call it anything other than treason and insurrection.

Ban MJ.

HAHAHAHAHA you really are pathetic.

I've learned there are some times in life where you should just shut the freak up.  This is one of those times mj.

Right back at you. The idea that any of you that want to react this way have any moral or intellectual high ground after a summer of flat out minimizing or poo-poo'ing the destruction that went on in this country is hilarious.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 02:52:47 PM
For the record, I condone absolutely none of this and hope its handled swiftly and securely by the appropriate authorities.

How hard is that in the middle of unwarranted aggression that could lead to casualties.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:53:18 PM
DC, MD, and VA national guard all activated.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 02:57:34 PM
Pence is actually telling people to leave the building and calling it an attack.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 02:57:36 PM
DC, MD, and VA national guard all activated.

freak 'em up
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 06, 2021, 02:57:54 PM
Quote
Tomi Lahren
@TomiLahren
If @realDonaldTrump
 were to lose (he won’t) his supporters will go to work tomorrow just as we do everyday. When Biden loses, his “supporters” will likely loot and riot. Tells you everything you need to know! #Trump2020

whoops
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 06, 2021, 02:58:51 PM
Quote
kelly cohen
@ByKellyCohen
·
2m
MSNBC just reported at least one IED was found on the capitol grounds. that is a bomb.


business is about to pick up
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 02:59:28 PM
Right back at you. The idea that any of you that want to react this way have any moral or intellectual high ground after a summer of flat out minimizing or poo-poo'ing the destruction that went on in this country is hilarious.

You probably shouldn't make generalizations towards one person.  I don't agree with the violence in any of the other protests or whatever you want to call them either.  Never did.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 03:00:49 PM
Hearing that some dingus is trying to take down the American flag and fly the Trump flag outside of the Capitol

lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 03:01:10 PM
whoops
Lmaoooo.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 03:02:51 PM
You probably shouldn't make generalizations towards one person. 

That's rich.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 03:05:30 PM
For the record, I condone absolutely none of this and hope its handled swiftly and securely by the appropriate authorities.

How hard is that in the middle of unwarranted aggression that could lead to casualties.

Not very. Why isn't your President saying it? It's kinda his job.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 03:09:08 PM
Ossoff won
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 03:09:23 PM
Nothing that has happened today can be compared to this summer.

At least the real President is willing to speak out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 03:13:20 PM
Not very. Why isn't your President saying it? It's kinda his job.

That's exactly what he's saying.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1346912780700577792?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet


Nothing that has happened today can be compared to this summer.

At least the real President is willing to speak out.

I'm sure thats solace to those affected in the face of the irreparable damage to peoples livelihoods nevermind the demonstrated body count in the face of this summers "mostly peaceful protests."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 03:13:21 PM
Ossoff won

Ossoff:  "excrement, I don't have to start today, do I?"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 03:20:01 PM
That's exactly what he's saying.

https://twitter.com/realDonaldTrump/status/1346912780700577792?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Well, it clearly isn't.

Your statement was clear and to the point. You clearly stated that you don't condone any of this illegal activity, you expect the authorities to deal with it, and you called it unwarranted aggression.

Your President said "please be nice to the cops".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 03:22:21 PM
I guess they could finish the certification elsewhere as long as they are all together.  May take a while to decontaminate the MAGA, COVID, and hillbilly from the capitol desks and furniture.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 03:23:09 PM
Holy freak Trump. Way to defuse this.

What a freaking bellend.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 03:23:15 PM
First sentence: We had an election that was stolen from us.

25th.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 03:23:22 PM
Well, it clearly isn't.

Your statement was clear and to the point. You clearly stated that you don't condone any of this illegal activity, you expect the authorities to deal with it, and you called it unwarranted aggression.

Your President said "please be nice to the cops".

NO VIOLENCE is fairly clear enough.


This isn't directed at you, but its interesting seeing the ACAB crowd and those who wanted to reference the freaking Boston Tea Party all summer all of a sudden back the blue.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 03:26:49 PM
He refuses to acknowledge that he lost the election.

“We love you, you are special.”

GTFO.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 03:27:10 PM
First sentence: We had an election that was stolen from us.

25th.

"Go home, we love you, you are very special"  Lol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 03:28:32 PM
NO VIOLENCE is fairly clear enough.

He literally just reinforced and justified the behaviour this afternoon.

"We had an election stolen from us."

"We love you."

"We won by a landslide."

You're a lawyer, you understand better than most the power and importance of words and how they're used. You know full well what he's saying here. It's not even disguised.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 03:30:39 PM
He literally just reinforced and justified the behaviour this afternoon.

"We had an election stolen from us."

"We love you."

"We won by a landslide."

You're a lawyer, you understand better than most the power and importance of words and how they're used. You know full well what he's saying here. It's not even disguised.

After four years of Russiagate and all that went with it, we're now complaining about electoral conspiracy theories are we?

NO VIOLENCE

What else does that mean?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 06, 2021, 03:32:25 PM
God
@TheTweetOfGod
·
54m
Hi Canada! What's up?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 06, 2021, 03:33:51 PM
https://twitter.com/rainnwilson/status/1346932611650904065?s=20
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 03:35:14 PM
These motherfuckers high fiveing each other on the National Mall are freaking despicable. These people should be in jail.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 03:36:01 PM
Only podium Trump stood at was the one at the freaking rally.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 03:36:03 PM
After four years of Russiagate and all that went with it, we're now complaining about electoral conspiracy theories are we?

NO VIOLENCE

What else does that mean?

On the basis of the fact that there's clear evidence of Russian involvement in the destabilisation of a variety of Western governments, yours included, and there's exactly zero evidence of electoral fraud in 2020, yes. I'm quite comfortable taking the moral high ground on that one.

NO VIOLENCE in isolation is clear. In the context of what Trump has said today, and not said, it's notable by what it isn't saying. Dude, stop fighting this one. There's no logical argument that doesn't end in condemnation of Trump, his disgraceful offspring, his sycophants in the House, and all of their words and actions over the last few days and weeks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 03:36:40 PM
On the basis of the fact that there's clear evidence of Russian involvement in the destabilisation of a variety of Western governments, yours included, and there's exactly zero evidence of electoral fraud in 2020, yes. I'm quite comfortable taking the moral high ground on that one.

NO VIOLENCE in isolation is clear. In the context of what Trump has said today, and not said, it's notable by what it isn't saying. Dude, stop fighting this one. There's no logical argument that doesn't end in condemnation of Trump, his disgraceful offspring, his sycophants in the House, and all of their words and actions over the last few days and weeks.

LMAO different view.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 03:38:15 PM
LMAO different view.

I think it's a ridiculous one, but I'm quite happy to discuss it in an adult fashion. I feel like if an argument is sufficiently poor it will demonstrate its own ridiculousness.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 03:40:38 PM
On the basis of the fact that there's clear evidence of Russian involvement in the destabilisation of a variety of Western governments, yours included, and there's exactly zero evidence of electoral fraud in 2020, yes. I'm quite comfortable taking the moral high ground on that one.

NO VIOLENCE in isolation is clear. In the context of what Trump has said today, and not said, it's notable by what it isn't saying. Dude, stop fighting this one. There's no logical argument that doesn't end in condemnation of Trump, his disgraceful offspring, his sycophants in the House, and all of their words and actions over the last few days and weeks.

That wasn't the argument re: Russia at the time at all, but I appreciate the now minimization of what was the entire narrative from 2016 until COVID because of how freaking stupid it was. I'll take it as a victory.

I haven't bothered getting into the election as to whether it was stolen or not around these parts, nor will i. There's absolutely no point. But rest assured we both think one is fantasy and one isn't.

LMAO different view.

You openly revel in your contempt for those who have differing views like an absolute psycho. I could not imagine walking around with that kind of anger.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 03:42:41 PM
https://twitter.com/OllieConnolly/status/1346934253053898760?s=20

Quote
Storming the Capital: “lovely people”.

Taking a knee: “sons of bitches.”

A look into the mind of Koz
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 06, 2021, 03:49:03 PM
https://twitter.com/NFLHumor/status/1346936617555144712
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 03:49:08 PM
I think it's a ridiculous one, but I'm quite happy to discuss it in an adult fashion. I feel like if an argument is sufficiently poor it will demonstrate its own ridiculousness.

I agree that one person in the exchange is willing to discuss it as an adult.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 03:51:04 PM
Cops in riot gear are staging just off of the Capitol building. It looks like they are prepping to kettle the mob at the Capitol building and the immediate area once the curfew goes into effect.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 03:52:13 PM
A national treasure. I’m not being ironic.

https://twitter.com/ilhanmn/status/1346934098384793606?s=21 (https://twitter.com/ilhanmn/status/1346934098384793606?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 03:52:39 PM
Cops in riot gear are staging just off of the Capitol building. It looks like they are prepping to kettle the mob at the Capitol building and the immediate area once the curfew goes into effect.

Wheres your ACAB take now you dumb freak? Fascism that the national guard is being called in?

Yeah, I'll at least quote you if/when I have something related to you to say.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 03:54:31 PM
Wheres your ACAB take now you dumb freak? Fascism that the national guard is being called in?

Yeah, I'll at least quote you if/when I have something related to you to say.

Imagine being this unhinged that you cannot tell the difference between a protest and an insurrection.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 03:55:18 PM
Wheres your ACAB take now you dumb freak?

I can't wait for someone to smack you in the face with a Twisted Tea
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 03:55:45 PM
I’m more than willing to believe that the majority of anger felt by the police force is that they were on duty and couldn’t participate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 03:56:24 PM


NO VIOLENCE is fairly clear enough.


This isn't directed at you, but its interesting seeing the ACAB crowd and those who wanted to reference the freaking Boston Tea Party all summer all of a sudden back the blue.

As the most ACAB person here I am not, in fact, rooting for them
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 03:58:22 PM
I can't wait for someone to smack you in the face with a Twisted Tea

It should totally be you.

Imagine being this unhinged that you cannot tell the difference between a protest and an insurrection.

Again, we can compare bodycounts from say this and Kenosha if you'd like.


As the most ACAB person here I am not, in fact, rooting for them

Lol, love that but it wasn't towards you either. Some can remain consistent, some can't.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 03:59:06 PM
I swear to god these poopchute cops better be busting up the eventual MAGA camps like they did the medical and water supply tents this summer. Do the actual job you were supposed to be doing all freaking day. Pieces of excrement on both sides.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 04:00:27 PM
https://twitter.com/cevansavenger/status/1346920924310867968?s=19

The Cops let them in.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 04:00:48 PM
It should totally be you.

Again, we can compare bodycounts from say this and Kenosha if you'd like.

Lol, love that but it wasn't towards you either. Some can remain consistent, some can't.

Imagine posting lime this and thinking you are serious adult.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 04:02:29 PM
Imagine posting lime this and thinking you are serious adult.

Hold on I'll have to notify my friends and loved ones I don't measure up to CatoTheElder's definition of an adult.

I have failed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 04:02:51 PM

As the most ACAB person here I am not, in fact, rooting for them

If excrement goes down tonight can you use the National Guard as a loophole?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 04:04:38 PM
I’m just asking them to do their basic freaking job instead of letting the US Capitol get breached. Most of the Capitol Police and MPD have proven why they don’t deserve to carry a weapon or wear a badge today.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 04:08:09 PM
Didn’t expect to see an American flag with yellow fringe on it getting carried around by this crowd but it's been a day of surprises.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 04:08:55 PM
If excrement goes down tonight can you use the National Guard as a loophole?
Depends what the protesters are doing and what the NG is doing in response.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 04:09:40 PM
Depends what the protesters are doing and what the NG is doing in response.

These are not protestors.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 04:09:49 PM
Every single on these terrorists should be executed for treason.

Every. Single. One.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/8bd99a4c668cbf7b737bd737b48c9886.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/177bd1202cb3cb215e41707f2d813168.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 04:10:08 PM
Didn’t expect to see an American flag with yellow fringe on it getting carried around by this crowd but it's been a day of surprises.

Sovereign citizens love the Admiralty flag because it means that mainland laws and law enforcement don't apply to them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 04:13:14 PM
Sovereign citizens love the Admiralty flag because it means that mainland laws and law enforcement don't apply to them.

Yea but it’s also the symbol of their oppressors. It’s almost like they are morons.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 04:13:42 PM
Every single on these terrorists should be executed for treason.

Every. Single. One.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/8bd99a4c668cbf7b737bd737b48c9886.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/177bd1202cb3cb215e41707f2d813168.jpg)

This is the second most disgusting thing I have seen today. First would have been that shots were fired on the Capitol grounds.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 04:14:32 PM
Yea but it’s also the symbol of their oppressors. It’s almost like they are morons.
"I hate the government but I love its enforcers" has always been a smooth-brained take.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 04:14:50 PM
The terrorists are promising they'll get violent tonight.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 04:15:25 PM
"I hate the government but I love its enforcers" has always been a smooth-brained take.

Almost like they don't actually hate the government. They hate governments that don't behave exactly as they wish they did.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 04:19:31 PM
Rance Priebus is calling the group domestic terrorists. Trump called them special.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 04:27:35 PM
Consistency. (https://twitter.com/zarzarbinkss/status/1346895410124759050?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 04:29:06 PM
NSFW
Magat being shot/dying?

She was part of the group trying to storm the capital building and was shot by a fellow freaking idiot.

https://v.redd.it/jmd1k25ytr961



Unconfirmed reports are she's dead.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 04:34:22 PM
Didn't think about that. 

Quote
"Quick-thinking" staffer secured electoral votes before rioters stormed Capitol
Senator Tammy Duckworth, a Democrat from Illinois, told CBS News that a Senate staffer managed to secure the wooden chests containing the Electoral College certificates before senators were evacuated from the Senate chamber.

"The good news is that one of the staff members was very, very quick-thinking, and was able to grab and secure the Electoral College ballots and bring them with her to this location," Duckworth said in a phone interview. "So we have them with us, and we will be able to proceed as long as Mitch McConnell calls us back into session."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 04:38:03 PM
Didn't think about that. 


Good on that staffer.

These fucks attacked the US Capitol and succeeded in disrupting the process of the election. They are criminals and traitors.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 04:40:09 PM
I’m not posting it, but if you look at Henry Winkler’s Twitter feed you can predict that he’s going to get a call from the FBI.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 06, 2021, 04:42:14 PM
I’m not posting it, but if you look at Henry Winkler’s Twitter feed you can predict that he’s going to get a call from the FBI.


nobody fucks with the Fonz
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 06, 2021, 04:42:41 PM
I want Barry Season 3.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 04:44:56 PM
The. Capitol. Police. Let. This. Happen.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 06, 2021, 04:45:29 PM
not a lot of social distancing going on there...tsk tsk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 06, 2021, 04:50:45 PM
Geoff Bennett
@GeoffRBennett
 · 2m
Pete Williams reports: Several law enforcement officials say the woman who was shot inside the U.S. Capitol building today has died.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 04:51:57 PM
SecDef didn’t even consult Trump about deploying the national guard. He spoke to Pence.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 04:53:18 PM
Geoff Bennett
@GeoffRBennett
 · 2m
Pete Williams reports: Several law enforcement officials say the woman who was shot inside the U.S. Capitol building today has died.

From the video posted it looks like she was trying to climb in through the window. Hard to know whether it was one of her own who shot her, or a member of law enforcement.

Hang on, let me go find my tiny violin. I think it's around here somewhere.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 04:57:01 PM
Pinko leftist antifa-loving scum The American Conservative call for Trump's immediate removal from office.

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/state-of-the-union/remove-trump-from-office/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 04:57:11 PM
13 arrested by MPD. 20 arrested by Capitol PD.

Not sure how many of them are related to the Capitol itself. As far as I can tell, MPD has no direct jurisdiction on federal property.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on January 06, 2021, 05:04:43 PM
This cracked me up given today's events.
https://twitter.com/MatthewKeysLive/status/1346954855655428100
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 05:07:06 PM
George W Bush referring to this as an insurrection.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 05:08:26 PM
In today's edition of "the business world and the markets love Trump":

(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErFAWROXIAMcdqe?format=png&name=900x900)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 05:09:17 PM
I guess this is the end of the whole "Trump will step down and have Pence pardon him" narrative.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 05:12:45 PM
I guess this is the end of the whole "Trump will step down and have Pence pardon him" narrative.

"I can't pardon you right now baby, I gots to take a excrement man."

(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/-0RJ9-45gMF8/WETdFLLH_tI/AAAAAAAAVEI/oXJEVkMJQAoBWwQyvuEA2xe4R30WrTipgCLcB/s1600/Mike%2BPence%252BVP%252BDonald%2BTrump%252BGeorge%2BStephanopoulos%252BThis%2BWeek%252BAlleged%2BVoter%2BFraud%252BR2E2%252BRationalization%2BRapport%2BEmpathy%2BExpression%252BBody%2BLanguage%2BExpert%252BBody%2BLanguage%252BNonverbal%252BSpeaker%252BKeynote%252BConsultant%252BLos%2BAngeles%252BLas%2BVegas%252BCalifornia%252BNYC%252BOrlando.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Libero_2 on January 06, 2021, 05:13:23 PM
This is an incredibly sad day in American history.

I am extremely anti politics. I stay the freak out of almost every political discussion that takes place in or around me, purely because I see no positive to those discussions and arguments, the vast majority of people are set in their views and are for the most part unwilling to change their minds despite evidence and reason presented to them.

This is something a friend of mine reached out and said that we haven’t seen news coverage and Imagery and sadness like this since 9/11. I think they might be right. This blows my mind that I live in a society that would result to this and to see a president that has stoked this fire and lead to the actions we see today.

Tonight we weep for the country and what we have lost with the actions by these people who are clearly out of their minds. I fear for the lives of Biden and Harris and the lives of everyone who will be working the inauguration. The fires of Hate have been stoked in our country and those who are angry are acting out their anger inappropriately and unfortunately it will take a lot of time for that anger to subside and this country to heal.

The violence we have seen today will not end tonight, it will not end on Inauguration Day, it will not end at the conclusion of year 1. It will be a long time, and that is an incredibly sad moment for a country as amazing as ours is
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on January 06, 2021, 05:15:16 PM
This is an incredibly sad day in American history.

I am extremely anti politics. I stay the freak out of almost every political discussion that takes place in or around me, purely because I see no positive to those discussions and arguments, the vast majority of people are set in their views and are for the most part unwilling to change their minds despite evidence and reason presented to them.

This is something a friend of mine reached out and said that we haven’t seen news coverage and Imagery and sadness like this since 9/11. I think they might be right. This blows my mind that I live in a society that would result to this and to see a president that has stoked this fire and lead to the actions we see today.

Tonight we weep for the country and what we have lost with the actions by these people who are clearly out of their minds. I fear for the lives of Biden and Harris and the lives of everyone who will be working the inauguration. The fires of Hate have been stoked in our country and those who are angry are acting out their anger inappropriately and unfortunately it will take a lot of time for that anger to subside and this country to heal.

The violence we have seen today will not end tonight, it will not end on Inauguration Day, it will not end at the conclusion of year 1. It will be a long time, and that is an incredibly sad moment for a country as amazing as ours is
It's a sad moment, but this isn't remotely surprising. The sad moment was when Trump won. Nonsense like this was inevitable as soon as you put someone like him in power.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 05:15:55 PM
He’s still inciting insurrection. The Cops are pushing back the remaining rioters back with kid gloves.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 05:17:48 PM
This is an incredibly sad day in American history.

I am extremely anti politics. I stay the freak out of almost every political discussion that takes place in or around me, purely because I see no positive to those discussions and arguments, the vast majority of people are set in their views and are for the most part unwilling to change their minds despite evidence and reason presented to them.

This is something a friend of mine reached out and said that we haven’t seen news coverage and Imagery and sadness like this since 9/11. I think they might be right. This blows my mind that I live in a society that would result to this and to see a president that has stoked this fire and lead to the actions we see today.

Tonight we weep for the country and what we have lost with the actions by these people who are clearly out of their minds. I fear for the lives of Biden and Harris and the lives of everyone who will be working the inauguration. The fires of Hate have been stoked in our country and those who are angry are acting out their anger inappropriately and unfortunately it will take a lot of time for that anger to subside and this country to heal.

The violence we have seen today will not end tonight, it will not end on Inauguration Day, it will not end at the conclusion of year 1. It will be a long time, and that is an incredibly sad moment for a country as amazing as ours is
Ehh, it'll all settle out soon.  Once these loonies get their $2000 stimulus check from Biden, they'll shut the freak up and retreat to the bowels of America from whence they came and resume watching Duck Dynasty reruns.

Time heals all wounds.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Libero_2 on January 06, 2021, 05:19:28 PM
It's a sad moment, but this isn't remotely surprising. The sad moment was when Trump won. Nonsense like this was inevitable as soon as you put someone like him in power.

Like I said, I stay out of these discussions because I’m very liberal and very against everything in the MAGA movement. I have strong opinions about Trump and I don’t disagree with this. I was physically ill when he was elected. I live in a (now) curfewed area of VA and thankfully I’m not there now, but I was set to return to VA tomorrow and I am certainly not about to do that. This scene is beyond mind melding and I can’t even imagine how history will treat this day 50 years from now. In my grandkids history “books” what will they say about this day?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 05:20:34 PM
Ehh, it'll all settle out soon.  Once these loonies get their $2000 stimulus check from Biden, they'll shut the freak up and retreat to the bowels of America from whence they came and resume watching Duck Dynasty reruns.

Time heals all wounds.


This bullshit will not be over soon, especially not if he tries to run again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Libero_2 on January 06, 2021, 05:20:52 PM
He’s still inciting insurrection. The Cops are pushing back the remaining rioters back with kid gloves.

I’m sure if the police make the first “violent” action then the insurrection will be “allowed” to fight back in “self defense.”

Bullshit as it all may be
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Libero_2 on January 06, 2021, 05:21:55 PM
This bullshit will not be over soon, especially not if he tries to run again.

If he tries to run again, I don’t think it will be as a republican, I think he will end up starting his own party and all of these people will support him, and god only knows what will happen if that’s the case
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 05:22:06 PM
https://twitter.com/KevOnStage/status/1346937897060945920
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 05:24:18 PM
I’m sure if the police make the first “violent” action then the insurrection will be “allowed” to fight back in “self defense.”

Bullshit as it all may be

The point is they used much harsher tactics this summer for people demanding an end to police brutality.

These people stormed the US Capitol and disrupted our election and the Cops are barely enforcing the curfew. This is why they are bastards.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 05:25:11 PM
https://twitter.com/KevOnStage/status/1346937897060945920

“Protestors”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Libero_2 on January 06, 2021, 05:28:33 PM
The point is they used much harsher tactics this summer for people demanding an end to police brutality.

These people stormed the US Capitol and disrupted our election and the Cops are barely enforcing the curfew. This is why they are bastards.

Whether we like it or not, what happened this summer is different, if only because it put these situations in the national spotlight. I can guarantee new methods, new trainings and new plans of action were created for handling these situations in different ways. I know this because I happen to have a friend who works for the FBI that went through these trainings leading up to the election. Now obviously the way the FBI trains their staff is certainly different than all forms of law enforcement, but my assumption is these trainings are being gone through other LEA.

This situation is different purely because it happened after and people are being trained to act differently. I hope this doesn’t devolve into violence like many of those did.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 05:28:39 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/06/twitter-pledges-action-on-any-calls-for-violence-in-capitol-riot.html

Time to cut this shithead off completely. Deplatform him from the mainstream sources and let him spend his time on Parler and OANN. He is an insurrectionist and an enemy of the state.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 05:35:15 PM
Whether we like it or not, what happened this summer is different, if only because it put these situations in the national spotlight. I can guarantee new methods, new trainings and new plans of action were created for handling these situations in different ways. I know this because I happen to have a friend who works for the FBI that went through these trainings leading up to the election. Now obviously the way the FBI trains their staff is certainly different than all forms of law enforcement, but my assumption is these trainings are being gone through other LEA.

This situation is different purely because it happened after and people are being trained to act differently. I hope this doesn’t devolve into violence like many of those did.

This situation is different because this is an act of insurrection. This is not a protest. This is people storming the US Capitol to disrupt a lawful election. Whether or not they have the mental capacity to fully realize the severity of their actions is another debate but letting people enter the Capitol is beyond me given that on any normal day I cannot get within 50 yards of the Rotunda’s door.

The complete inadequacy of the security force stationed during a rally where multiple participants had made open and blatant calls to violence on social media is either sheer stupidity or willful complicity.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 05:39:00 PM
Any Senator or Member of Congress who was complicit in stoking this act of domestic terrorism should be expelled from their position.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 05:43:27 PM
Senate vote count expected to continue at 8.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 05:44:23 PM
Senate vote count expected to continue at 8.

Will be interesting to see if the representatives from Arizona, Louisiana, Colorado and so on are still as keen to object to the results.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 05:45:58 PM
Will be interesting to see if the representatives from Arizona, Louisiana, Colorado and so on are still as keen to object to the results.

I’m guessing the QAnon Congresswomen and that poopchute former Jet will be ready to continue.

Not sure about Cruz and Hawley.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 05:48:48 PM
Apparently a pipe bomb was found and deactivated at the RNC.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 05:49:17 PM
Apparently a pipe bomb was found and deactivated at the RNC.

Yeah, MB posted that earlier.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 05:50:48 PM
Let's freaking go.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210106/50ecd0b9ab7da0fe28eb5d20f1fde607.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 05:56:41 PM
McMorris-Rodgers will no longer object to the certification.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 05:57:56 PM
This is an incredibly sad day in American history.

I am extremely anti politics. I stay the freak out of almost every political discussion that takes place in or around me, purely because I see no positive to those discussions and arguments, the vast majority of people are set in their views and are for the most part unwilling to change their minds despite evidence and reason presented to them.

This is something a friend of mine reached out and said that we haven’t seen news coverage and Imagery and sadness like this since 9/11. I think they might be right. This blows my mind that I live in a society that would result to this and to see a president that has stoked this fire and lead to the actions we see today.

Tonight we weep for the country and what we have lost with the actions by these people who are clearly out of their minds. I fear for the lives of Biden and Harris and the lives of everyone who will be working the inauguration. The fires of Hate have been stoked in our country and those who are angry are acting out their anger inappropriately and unfortunately it will take a lot of time for that anger to subside and this country to heal.

The violence we have seen today will not end tonight, it will not end on Inauguration Day, it will not end at the conclusion of year 1. It will be a long time, and that is an incredibly sad moment for a country as amazing as ours is
I still think it's pretty funny.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 06:06:23 PM
I still think it's pretty funny.

Given that this city is my home, I fail to see the humor.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 06:08:06 PM
Given that this city is my home, I fail to see the humor.

You might like this a bit more.

https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/krzo94/local_dc_resident_expressing_his_feelings_about/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 06:10:33 PM
You might like this a bit more.

https://www.reddit.com/r/PublicFreakout/comments/krzo94/local_dc_resident_expressing_his_feelings_about/

I feel like I know where that house is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 06:10:50 PM
Twitter just locked Trump’s account for 12 hours.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 06:16:31 PM
Twitter just locked Trump’s account for 12 hours.
lol

https://twitter.com/TwitterSafety/status/1346970431039934464?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 06:18:23 PM
The freaking scumbag.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/ee4c77ffa8d8a8ea7b60efbab7344eb1.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 06:18:52 PM
Rep. Adam Smith not pulling any punches discussing today’s act of domestic terrorism.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 06:19:49 PM
The freaking scumbag.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/ee4c77ffa8d8a8ea7b60efbab7344eb1.jpg)

I am so freaking here for Pence v Trump.

"He fucks men!"

We don't care, Donald. Your turn Mike.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 06, 2021, 06:20:53 PM
https://twitter.com/11thhour/status/1346958469073661953?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 06:21:21 PM
The freaking scumbag.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/ee4c77ffa8d8a8ea7b60efbab7344eb1.jpg)

Adam Smith is saying that Trump was not in the chain of command on the decision to activate the National Guard. Acting SECDEF and AG both went to Pence.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Libero_2 on January 06, 2021, 06:23:10 PM
https://twitter.com/11thhour/status/1346958469073661953?s=21
that looks almost like a scene from that show Designated Survivor.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 06:24:10 PM
There's a conspiracy on twitter that the 25th was invoked in secret and that's why pence did the Nat guard thing and why twitter is finally taking action, when they said he was cool till he wasn't president .


I enjoy that, tbh .
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 06:31:22 PM
There's a conspiracy on twitter that the 25th was invoked in secret and that's why pence did the Nat guard thing and why twitter is finally taking action, when they said he was cool till he wasn't president .


I enjoy that, tbh .

At the very least the situations is telling indictment on Trump’s incompetence.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 06:32:02 PM
FLOTUS chief of staff just resigned over today, for whatever that is worth.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 06:34:19 PM
FLOTUS chief of staff just resigned over today, for whatever that is worth.
Why does she even need one just to wear a pouty face and miss verbs?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 06:37:43 PM
Rep. Adam Smith not pulling any punches discussing today’s act of domestic terrorism.

Give me a minute, I'm going to fix your avatar.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 06:41:53 PM
Give me a minute, I'm going to fix your avatar.

Gracias
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 06:42:59 PM
Gracias

De nada
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 06:47:35 PM
DC AG Karl Racine: Pence needs to invoke the 25th.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 06:47:53 PM
Just a simple protest that got a bit carried away..... those are plastic flex cuffs.

(https://i.imgur.com/e2s7UXT.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 06:57:40 PM
Just a simple protest that got a bit carried away..... those are plastic flex cuffs.

(https://i.imgur.com/e2s7UXT.png)

Geeze, wonder what act of protest those were for.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 06, 2021, 06:59:49 PM
Geeze, wonder what act of protest those were for.
Just making sure any loose power cords were properly secured.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 07:00:34 PM
Just making sure any loose power cords were properly secured.

“Anyone need their RGB cables managed?”

But seriously freak this guy and I hope he is IDed and prosecuted for domestic terrorism.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 07:03:26 PM
Quite a diverse group

https://twitter.com/LalehKhalili/status/1346952387995574272?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 07:03:30 PM
“Anyone need their RGB cables managed?”

But seriously freak this guy and I hope he is IDed and prosecuted for domestic terrorism.

Given the amount of footage that exists of today, I expect that the FBI and Homeland Security are going to have a busy next few weeks. Imagine not wearing a mask because you value your freedom, and it turning out to be the reason you lose it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 07:08:17 PM
Quite a diverse group

https://twitter.com/LalehKhalili/status/1346952387995574272?s=19

I'm willing to guess that the ones carrying the Iranian monarchist flag are about as Iranian as the majority of people I've seen wearing Blacks for Trump shirts are actually black.

Edit: thanks, Badger, missed that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 07:11:30 PM
I'm willing to guess that the ones carrying the Iranian flag are about as Iranian as the majority of people I've seen wearing Blacks for Trump shirts are actually black.
Key word monarchist, they long for another US-picked leader of Iran, so their Trump support checks out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 07:12:58 PM
Key word monarchist, they long for another US-picked leader of Iran, so their Trump support checks out.

Edited.

Why is Bernie on the phone with Anderson Cooper while the Senate recommences it’s session?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 06, 2021, 07:15:56 PM
Sen. Mitch McConnell: “We will certify the winner of the 2020 presidential election. Criminal behavior will never dominate the U.S. Congress. Our republic is strong. The American people deserve nothing less.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 07:16:10 PM
LMAO insurrection.
Mitch seems to agree.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/9b3ea88f8df9fd56940084a429afbef0.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 07:17:34 PM
The remaining domestic terrorists have been kettled on the National Mall and are currently being zip tied and loaded onto buses.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 07:18:34 PM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/aee6ef3f39d506890251394526ecd5c2.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 07:37:29 PM
Gov. Murphy is sending NJ State Police to DC, ready to call up NJ National Guard to assist if requested.

Edit: source

 https://twitter.com/govmurphy/status/1346939090147667970?s=21 (https://twitter.com/govmurphy/status/1346939090147667970?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 07:39:31 PM
Said it earlier....

Get the National guard and a strong swat and police presence in the capital before they announce the 25th has been enacted...(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/9a36cfc0932a6b2c115b2c7135586710.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 08:02:29 PM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/324c4ee9cd884a87e130d06ea2758511.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 08:04:59 PM
Sen. Roger Marshall can freak right the hell off a bridge.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 08:19:58 PM
Will be interesting to see if the representatives from Arizona, Louisiana, Colorado and so on are still as keen to object to the results.

Hawley is still on his bullshit.

Also just said irregardless, which bothers me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 08:31:48 PM
Romney to the rest of the Republican Party: cut the excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 08:37:20 PM
Romney to the rest of the Republican Party: cut the excrement.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/571bb4dd2fe89b3a6a0b83361bbe6d83.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 08:51:21 PM
https://twitter.com/olivianuzzi/status/1347006653892337664?s=21 (https://twitter.com/olivianuzzi/status/1347006653892337664?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 09:00:07 PM
I'm sure this just a huge coincidence. Totally (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/54b4ec61165826cdf5c92aa52f178b34.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Andrew Ryan on January 06, 2021, 09:10:26 PM
Et tu, Lindsey?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on January 06, 2021, 09:14:32 PM
https://twitter.com/DeadKennedys/status/1347008399565680640?s=20
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 09:15:42 PM
Lindsay is either excited he's about to be free of huge burden, or so beyond scared he's freaking out.

Sweet.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Libero_2 on January 06, 2021, 09:17:43 PM
Lindsay is either excited he's about to be free of huge burden, or so beyond scared he's freaking out.

Sweet.

 https://images.app.goo.gl/JH9hpmyZ9CtG3pm19 (https://images.app.goo.gl/JH9hpmyZ9CtG3pm19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 09:18:17 PM
Ayes for the Arizona objection.

 Cruz, Hawley, Hyde-Smith, Kenedy, Marshall, Tuberville.

https://twitter.com/jessicataylor/status/1347016657454170115?s=21 (https://twitter.com/jessicataylor/status/1347016657454170115?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2021, 09:20:36 PM
https://twitter.com/olivianuzzi/status/1347006653892337664?s=21 (https://twitter.com/olivianuzzi/status/1347006653892337664?s=21)
2024 nominee

Or Tucker Carlson
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 09:31:09 PM
2024 nominee

Or Tucker Carlson

I read this and immediately felt someone walking over my grave.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2021, 09:45:14 PM
So before we overreact here, are we sure that these are actually Trump supporters? I see some people dressed in black, I'm pretty sure that this is an antifa false flag operation designed to make true patriots look bad. Guessing Soros is funding it.

Matt Gaetz actually already made this claim. Not joking.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 09:46:33 PM
Matt Gaetz actually already made this claim. Not joking.

The House has identified the 84 worst members in session right now. Gaetz is most definitely one of them.

EDIT: It’s up to 103, guess it wasn’t a hard timer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 09:50:42 PM
kevin mccarthy is giving the police props, you know, the same scumbags who opened the gates for them and let them take over the capital before they killed one and let nearly all of them go with no reprecussions. go cops go?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 09:52:07 PM
eat a dick kevin mccarthy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 09:55:46 PM
According to McCaskill, Rudy left a voicemail for Tuberville on the wrong Senator’s phone asking him to object to 10 States.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 09:58:25 PM
https://mirror.fro.wtf/reddit/publicfreakout/ks18gg.mp4

DC cops enforcing curfew as proud boys and supporters continue to gather

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 10:01:39 PM
https://mirror.fro.wtf/reddit/publicfreakout/ks18gg.mp4

DC cops enforcing curfew as proud boys and supporters continue to gather

(https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/026/031/Screen_Shot_2018-04-27_at_11.43.10_AM.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 10:04:54 PM
https://mirror.fro.wtf/reddit/publicfreakout/ks18gg.mp4

DC cops enforcing curfew as proud boys and supporters continue to gather



Guess they won't be backing the blue anymore when they are the ones hearing the truncheons ring.

Something something if they didn't resist blah blah blah.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Libero_2 on January 06, 2021, 10:10:36 PM
https://mirror.fro.wtf/reddit/publicfreakout/ks18gg.mp4

DC cops enforcing curfew as proud boys and supporters continue to gather



Does this mean everyone can be happy the protestors are now getting some violence pushed back at them as things happened elsewhere this year?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 10:11:49 PM
Does this mean everyone can be happy the protestors are now getting some violence pushed back at them as things happened elsewhere this year?

Excessive force is wrong.

I’m just trying to figure out which of those two are more confused about cops beating white people
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 10:17:28 PM
ashli babbit, the woman who was killed at the capitol today

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2021/jan/6/ashli-babbit-identified-air-force-vet-killed-capit/
Ms. Babbit, who served four tours of duty during her 14 years in the Air Force

https://www.shethepeople.tv/news/who-is-ashli-babbit-pro-trump-protester-shot-capitol/

(https://www.shethepeople.tv/wp-content/uploads/2021/01/ashli-babbitt-twitter-1.jpg)


here she is just before the fatal shot, jumping through a window to break into a restricted area of the capitol building
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErF-CApUcAEwL9r.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 10:18:48 PM
Capitol Police are going to be a little thin in a few days.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/06/capitol-riots-police-firings-455698 (https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/06/capitol-riots-police-firings-455698)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 10:34:21 PM
https://twitter.com/Andrew_Ferrelli/status/1346934612266807296?s=19 (https://twitter.com/Andrew_Ferrelli/status/1346934612266807296?s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 10:38:17 PM
According to McCaskill, Rudy left a voicemail for Tuberville on the wrong Senator’s phone asking him to object to 10 States.

here it is, in all it's treason

https://twitter.com/RexChapman/status/1347034861698211853
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 10:50:09 PM
the house tried to oppose georgia, but all the senators backed out and the opposition failed.

freaking finally.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 10:53:10 PM
the house tried to oppose georgia, but all the senators backed out and the opposition failed.

freaking finally.


I think Moscow Mitch showed them the knife.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 11:01:04 PM
michigan trying to object now...another failure as no senators have signed.

looks like the rest of the objections should fail similarly and biden/harris should be confirmed shortly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 11:02:27 PM
michigan trying to object now...another failure as no senators have signed.

looks like the rest of the objections should fail similarly and biden/harris should be confirmed shortly.


It was Marjorie Taylor Greene presenting the objection.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 11:09:59 PM
Pipe bombs and Molotov cocktails found near the Capitol grounds.

LMAO Insurrection! freaking moron.

https://twitter.com/evanlamberttv/status/1347029195155759106?s=21 (https://twitter.com/evanlamberttv/status/1347029195155759106?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 06, 2021, 11:15:46 PM
for freak sake.

pennsylvania objection has a senator signed. this is garbage.

lets go waste even more time making the same tired arguments that will fail.

again.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2021, 11:20:19 PM
Pipe bombs and Molotov cocktails found near the Capitol grounds.

LMAO Insurrection! freaking moron.

https://twitter.com/evanlamberttv/status/1347029195155759106?s=21 (https://twitter.com/evanlamberttv/status/1347029195155759106?s=21)

Lmao you use the nickname Moscow Mitch you absolute stupid freak.

Kvetch about molotovs but let me know when they're lit and thrown at freaking cop cars, as thats your version of "peaceful protest."

Your hack outrage freaking stinks to high heaven. If you had a shred of any integrity this outrage wouldve been prevalent when some psycho tried to light up a softball field with the express intent of killing as many republican congressmen as possible, you absolute stupid freak.

Let me know when a freaking actual BAIL FUND to bail out these jerkoffs is started, until then save your false outrage as I laugh at your fanboi with a capital I avatar you absolutely sorry sack of excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 11:31:32 PM
for freak sake.

pennsylvania objection has a senator signed. this is garbage.

lets go waste even more time making the same tired arguments that will fail.

again.



It was Hawley. Dude’s a piece of excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 11:42:51 PM
The Senate has voted not to sustain The objection to Pennsylvania’s votes being counted.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2021, 11:56:09 PM
Imagine not being able to let go of something said about you by a stranger on the internet.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 07, 2021, 05:35:33 AM
Quote
The FBI is setting up a website to collect evidence & tips about the violent rioting at the US Capitol today. FBI urges anyone who witnessed unlawful violent actions to submit tips at https://t.co/nN0ao9O6ib. Agents looking for videos or photos  to help identify federal crimes.

This will take a lot of resources.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 07, 2021, 05:40:52 AM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/416a96cc97436f2a01a5024de613083c.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 05:54:56 AM
https://twitter.com/jpbrammer/status/1347034565651685376?s=21 (https://twitter.com/jpbrammer/status/1347034565651685376?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 07, 2021, 07:26:39 AM
Lmao you use the nickname Moscow Mitch you absolute stupid freak.

Kvetch about molotovs but let me know when they're lit and thrown at freaking cop cars, as thats your version of "peaceful protest."

Your hack outrage freaking stinks to high heaven. If you had a shred of any integrity this outrage wouldve been prevalent when some psycho tried to light up a softball field with the express intent of killing as many republican congressmen as possible, you absolute stupid freak.

Let me know when a freaking actual BAIL FUND to bail out these jerkoffs is started, until then save your false outrage as I laugh at your fanboi with a capital I avatar you absolutely sorry sack of excrement.

jesus...what's wrong with you? Did a democratic uncle touch your peepee or something?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 07:38:12 AM
jesus...what's wrong with you? Did a democratic uncle touch your peepee or something?

The guy defends Nazis and Klansmen. He’s clearly got some issues.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 07, 2021, 07:58:53 AM
Mulvaney resigned

Quote
"I called Mike Pompeo last night to let him know I was resigning from that. I can’t do it. I can’t stay," Mulvaney said in the interview.
He added: "Those who choose to stay, and I have talked with some of them, are choosing to stay because they’re worried the President might put someone worse in."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 07, 2021, 08:01:11 AM
stop resigning and sign the freaking paperwork to 25th his derriere you complicit cowards
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 08:12:27 AM
Mulvaney resigned


If only there was a constitutional provision that could be utilized for a President when his cabinet is worried he could act in a way detrimental to the security and safety of the United States.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 07, 2021, 08:17:33 AM
If only there was a constitutional provision that could be utilized for a President when his cabinet is worried he could act in a way detrimental to the security and safety of the United States.

They're all excrement scared of the kind of rabid lunatics that form his supporter base.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 08:18:43 AM
They're all excrement scared of the kind of rabid lunatics that form his supporter base.

I’m aware. His rabid supporter base is also a bunch of incel pussies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 07, 2021, 08:37:43 AM
jesus...what's wrong with you? Did a democratic uncle touch your peepee or something?
Everybody knows all American uncles are Republicans
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 07, 2021, 08:38:30 AM
Everybody knows all American uncles are Republicans

and Aunt Edna.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 07, 2021, 09:20:14 AM
after yesterdays events, i see no reason to be scared of those chumps.

they were let into a secure area, broke into a secure building, let one of their own get killed before valiantly breaking the police lines and breeching the capital building.

and then they took a bunch of selfies, stole some mail, meandered around and made a mess and then the police came and cleared em out like they were a bunch of drunks after last call.


these morons had no clue, no plan, no hope. if im a senator, im doubling down and calling for investigations into the capital polices utter failure to stop a bunch of untrained morons, investigations into what they did once inside, investigations into why there was no remote IT shutdown initiated on the lockdown, investigations into why so much of the GOP was complicit and insisting on fracturing the nation w/ no evidence whatsoever. i want to start proceedings to get trump out immediately.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 07, 2021, 09:27:03 AM
https://twitter.com/lastchapter_/status/1346905998959763460?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 07, 2021, 09:35:08 AM
hahahahahaha

i wonder if he just slowly rolled backwards as he saw smoke in the distance and heard gunshots and yelling....
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 07, 2021, 10:25:43 AM
https://twitter.com/ashli_babbitt/status/1345125644888281088?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 07, 2021, 10:30:04 AM
Quote

Four people died during violent pro-Trump protests at the U.S. Capitol, the Metropolitan Police Department said Wednesday night. One woman was shot inside the Capitol, and three others died after suffering "medical emergencies," police said.

A woman was shot by a plainclothes Capitol Police officer after breaching the Capitol and attempting to enter the House chamber, according to acting Metropolitan Police Chief Robert Contee. She was transported to a local hospital where she was later pronounced dead, Contee said. The shooting is being investigated by MPD's internal affairs unit, which is responsible for investigating all officer-involved deaths in Washington, D.C., even those involving other agencies.

Police have not yet released the identity of the woman. The woman was a civilian and was not a member of any law enforcement agency, according to MPD.

In addition to the shooting, one woman and two men died "around the Capitol grounds" after suffering "separate medical emergencies," Contee said. Contee did not identify any of the deceased or provide further information on the medical issues that lead to their deaths.

CBS
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 07, 2021, 10:42:56 AM
jesus...what's wrong with you? Did a democratic uncle touch your peepee or something?

The amount of stupidity that goes into this comment is the same one that goes into insulting someone on the basis of their second job and thinking you have the right in the argument, you ignorant fathead.

Anyway, while we're desiring to see everyone who was there locked up on the basis of treason, I guess I should've demanded the same thing when a bunch of retards stormed and occupied the capital building to protest a supreme court nomination as what happened with Kavanaugh. The kvetching over this from the "ItS jUst PrIvatE pROpErTy" and ACAB imbeciles like the hypocrisy isn't obvious.


 
The guy defends Nazis and Klansmen. He’s clearly got some issues.

You're a pathetic drone.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 07, 2021, 10:57:44 AM
CBS

There's a story going round that one of the deaths was a heart attack as a result of a member of Meal Team Six accidentally tasering himself. I can't tell you how much I want it to be true.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 11:00:23 AM
after yesterdays events, i see no reason to be scared of those chumps.

they were let into a secure area, broke into a secure building, let one of their own get killed before valiantly breaking the police lines and breeching the capital building.

and then they took a bunch of selfies, stole some mail, meandered around and made a mess and then the police came and cleared em out like they were a bunch of drunks after last call.


these morons had no clue, no plan, no hope. if im a senator, im doubling down and calling for investigations into the capital polices utter failure to stop a bunch of untrained morons, investigations into what they did once inside, investigations into why there was no remote IT shutdown initiated on the lockdown, investigations into why so much of the GOP was complicit and insisting on fracturing the nation w/ no evidence whatsoever. i want to start proceedings to get trump out immediately.



The House is already saying they will investigate and hold the Capitol Police accountable.

The only warning I have against outright dismissing these schmucks is that the Beer Hall Putsch failed and the Nazis were ridiculed as a joke, for a while.

But these motherfuckers are just at a stage where they are LARPing their own right wing rebellion. They even use that exact phrase for this excrement. They don't have any actual plan, they just start snapping selfies and stealing people's mail.

However, the fact that they are incompetent does not mean that they are not dangerous. This wasn't a bakery, it wasn't a car, it wasn't the Cheesecake Factory, this was the seat of our government.

This was sedition and every lover of the older lady who smashed a window, stormed through rotunda, and vandalized offices and the Senate chamber deserves to stand trial for it. All because of the bruised ego of a deranged lunatic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 07, 2021, 11:07:55 AM
stop resigning and sign the freaking paperwork to 25th his derriere you complicit cowards

Exactly!

Pompeo is a piece of excrement and a coward. History is going to remember those who contributed to this psychopath's reign. Bailing now isn't helping you. Being part of a solution might.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 07, 2021, 11:09:59 AM
(https://i.redd.it/ys380rtaww961.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 07, 2021, 11:10:49 AM
The amount of stupidity that goes into this comment is the same one that goes into insulting someone on the basis of their second job and thinking you have the right in the argument, you ignorant fathead.

Anyway, while we're desiring to see everyone who was there locked up on the basis of treason, I guess I should've demanded the same thing when a bunch of retards stormed and occupied the capital building to protest a supreme court nomination as what happened with Kavanaugh. The kvetching over this from the "ItS jUst PrIvatE pROpErTy" and ACAB imbeciles like the hypocrisy isn't obvious.


 
You're a pathetic drone.

lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 11:14:43 AM
Exactly!

Pompeo is a piece of excrement and a coward. History is going to remember those who contributed to this psychopath's reign. Bailing now isn't helping you. Being part of a solution might.

Resigning now will not save their reputations. They had the chance to fix this multiple times and they chose every other option.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 07, 2021, 11:20:08 AM

The only warning I have against outright dismissing these schmucks is that the Beer Hall Putsch failed and the Nazis were ridiculed as a joke, for a while.


This was sedition and every lover of the older lady who smashed a window, stormed through rotunda, and vandalized offices and the Senate chamber deserves to stand trial for it. All because of the bruised ego of a deranged lunatic.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 07, 2021, 11:20:39 AM
Resigning now will not save their reputations. They had the chance to fix this multiple times and they chose every other option.

They even still have one more.

And they're choosing to take their ball and go home.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 07, 2021, 11:24:11 AM
The only warning I have against outright dismissing these schmucks is that the Beer Hall Putsch failed and the Nazis were ridiculed as a joke, for a while.

I know what you mean, but I can't hear Beer Hall Putsch and think of anything other than Doug Stanhope. And now I really, really want to know what Doug Stanhope has to say about yesterday's little drama.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 11:27:08 AM
I know what you mean, but I can't hear Beer Hall Putsch and think of anything other than Doug Stanhope. And now I really, really want to know what Doug Stanhope has to say about yesterday's little drama.

The same opinion he has on every topic. “I’m somehow not the worst person to host The Man Show.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 07, 2021, 11:30:03 AM
I know what you mean, but I can't hear Beer Hall Putsch and think of anything other than Doug Stanhope.

His bit about his mom's suicide is a work of art.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 07, 2021, 11:41:18 AM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/6c87ffe78b58f84707f90471da285747.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 07, 2021, 11:45:38 AM
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
@AOC
If the 25th amendment is not invoked today, Congress must reconvene immediately for impeachment and removal proceedings.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 07, 2021, 11:47:12 AM
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez
@AOC
If the 25th amendment is not invoked today, Congress must reconvene immediately for impeachment and removal proceedings.

They've already filed articles for impeachment, I think. Which presumably they can pass in two weeks' time given they'll have the majority in both houses.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 11:51:26 AM
They've already filed articles for impeachment, I think. Which presumably they can pass in two weeks' time given they'll have the majority in both houses.

I don't think Warnock and and Ossoff have had their elections certified yet, so the motion would rely on another bipartisan vote to convict which has only happened once before. However, the one time it has happened was with the current president and after yesterday I'm thinking a few more Republican senators would be willing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on January 07, 2021, 11:52:06 AM
So which is it:
- The cops and security are completely incompetent
- The cops and security were in on it
- Little bit of both

I don't see a third option for defending our security during this issue. A Republican rep didn't send any staff in that day. A Democratic rep told her husband where to find her will the night before. People on the right wing fringes have been talking about Jan. 6 as a day of reckoning for a while. This shouldn't have been that surprising to people whose job it is to protect the Capitol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 11:53:48 AM
Little of both, probably.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 07, 2021, 11:58:32 AM
I don't think Warnock and and Ossoff have had their elections certified yet, so the motion would rely on another bipartisan vote to convict which has only happened once before. However, the one time it has happened was with the current president and after yesterday I'm thinking a few more Republican senators would be willing.

Yeah, that's why I said it would be in a couple of weeks - they would need to be sure of having the votes. It doesn't remove him from office, but it prevents him from ever running again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 12:04:10 PM
It doesn't remove him from office, but it prevents him from ever running again.

Which would be the incentive for some of the Republicans to switch and vote to convict. There’s enough in the Senate who don't want to deal with his excrement again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 07, 2021, 12:13:05 PM
Which would be the incentive for some of the Republicans to switch and vote to convict. There’s enough in the Senate who don't want to deal with his excrement again.

Maybe, but I bet they'd rather leave it to the Dems so they don't upset the Trumpists whose votes they still want.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 12:36:10 PM
Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao to resign.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 07, 2021, 12:37:59 PM
Secretary of Transportation Elaine Chao to resign.
Wonder if Mitch had something to do with it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 07, 2021, 01:19:11 PM
“It’s time to invoke the 25th Amendment and to end this nightmare,” Rep. Adam Kinzinger of Illinois said today, becoming the first Republican to call for invoking it. “The president is unfit and the president is unwell.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 07, 2021, 01:19:25 PM
NPR Politics
@nprpolitics
#BREAKING: House Speaker Nancy Pelosi says the 25th Amendment should be invoked to remove President Trump from office, and if it isn't, "Congress may be prepared to move forward with impeachment.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 07, 2021, 01:21:33 PM
LFG
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 01:29:50 PM
Do it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 07, 2021, 01:44:00 PM
Ok so do it then...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 07, 2021, 01:44:40 PM
Activate Pelosi's funbags for the impeachment sequence.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 02:07:22 PM
House Sergeant at Arms Paul Irving has resigned.

Pelosi is calling on U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund to do the same.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 07, 2021, 02:16:29 PM
Activate Pelosi's funbags for the impeachment sequence.
Pew pew(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/5ee0ac8c384bedca39705e4b20d0818e.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 07, 2021, 02:39:09 PM
Laser eyes? Pft.

Laser funbags.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 07, 2021, 02:40:43 PM
Get that 25th before he can pardon anyone else.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 07, 2021, 02:58:40 PM
Pew pew(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/5ee0ac8c384bedca39705e4b20d0818e.gif)

breast missiles!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 07, 2021, 03:03:08 PM
Get that 25th before he can pardon anyone else.

Including himself and his family.

The 25th should have been invoked last night. As bad as everything has been, giving him more and more time just allows him the opportunity to start tossing out pardons for allies and worse, himself. He could set an incredibly dangerous precedent.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 07, 2021, 03:09:24 PM
Quote
Acting Attorney General Jeffrey Rosen vowed that pro-Trump rioters who entered the U.S. Capitol would "face the full consequences of their actions under the law," and those consequences could include being charged under President Trump's executive order authorizing up to 10 years in prison for "injury of federal property."

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 06:05:43 PM
U.S. Capitol Police Chief Steven Sund to resign next week.

Source (https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.axios.com/capitol-police-chief-resigns-steven-sund-75bc3e7e-cd5f-4c5d-b34e-05dc05fc2846.html)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 07:21:27 PM
MPD member is saying that off duty cops and members of the military were involved with overrunning the Capitol yesterday (not shocked). Any military member involved yesterday should be court martialed. Cops can get arrested and assigned their last collar as a celly.

https://twitter.com/natashabertrand/status/1347327314363904006?s=21 (https://twitter.com/natashabertrand/status/1347327314363904006?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 07, 2021, 07:33:39 PM
Simon and Schuster cancelled Josh Hawley's book
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 07:38:00 PM
Good, man has a terrible concept of grammar.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 07, 2021, 07:39:24 PM
MPD member is saying that off duty cops and members of the military were involved with overrunning the Capitol yesterday (not shocked). Any military member involved yesterday should be court martialed. Cops can get arrested and assigned their last collar as a celly.

https://twitter.com/natashabertrand/status/1347327314363904006?s=21 (https://twitter.com/natashabertrand/status/1347327314363904006?s=21)
Presumably participating in something like yesterday would be a mindblowingly serious offense in a military court? I don't know what the land based version of mutiny is but I'm guessing it's that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 07:41:50 PM
Presumably participating in something like yesterday would be a mindblowingly serious offense in a military court? I don't know what the land based version of mutiny is but I'm guessing it's that.

Forcing your way into a government occupied build without authorization alone is a huge offense, I’d arrested if I tried to blow by the gate at my office. Breaking into Congress would almost certainly end in a jail sentence.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 07:44:52 PM
Just going to leave this one here.

https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-attempted-coup-federal-law-enforcement-capitol-police-2021-1 (https://www.businessinsider.com/trump-attempted-coup-federal-law-enforcement-capitol-police-2021-1)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 07, 2021, 07:49:14 PM
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/republican-lawmakers-rioters-capitol-photos-b1784170.html

6 republican state reps were confirmed to have been involved in the failed insurrection yesterday. How they haven't been arrested and charged yet, I don't know. Or removed from their positions as state lawmakers, since they are traitors to the USA
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 07, 2021, 07:52:00 PM
Simon and Schuster cancelled Josh Hawley's book
"tHiS iS eXaCtLy LiKe 1984!" - man facing mild consequences of his actions

https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1347327743004995585?s=09
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 08:01:36 PM
"tHiS iS eXaCtLy LiKe 1984!" - man facing mild consequences of his actions

https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1347327743004995585?s=09

Hawley is a freaking sociopath and the slicker demagogue. He should be expelled from Congress.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 07, 2021, 08:40:40 PM
https://twitter.com/cleavon_md/status/1346990726115061760?s=21

Sorry if this is a repost but everyone needs to see this lady rubbing an onion in her eye
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 07, 2021, 08:47:19 PM
Hawley is a freaking sociopath and the slicker demagogue. He should be expelled from Congress.
Relevant reminder

https://twitter.com/banditelli/status/1347220667163267072?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 08:49:15 PM
Relevant reminder

https://twitter.com/banditelli/status/1347220667163267072?s=19

It's OK, we have her on MSNBC telling everyone why they won't win.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on January 07, 2021, 08:54:38 PM
It's OK, we have her on MSNBC telling everyone why they won't win.

she is the most annoying part of msnbc
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 07, 2021, 08:57:15 PM
she is the most annoying part of msnbc
Possibly but it's an extremely high bar.

I basically can't stand anyone on MSNBC besides Chris Hayes and I still don't watch a second of his show.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 07, 2021, 08:57:40 PM
she is the most annoying part of msnbc
Al Sharpton.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 07, 2021, 09:01:11 PM
Devos resigned. Probably dodging having to vote on removing Trump.  She's gone soon anyway, so it isn't a big deal for anyone.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 07, 2021, 09:02:27 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210107/6c87ffe78b58f84707f90471da285747.jpg)
Amazing

https://nypost.com/2021/01/07/nyc-man-who-breached-us-capitol-is-son-of-prominent-brooklyn-judge/

Quote
A New York City man who breached the US Capitol building wearing a bizarre fur costume is the son of a Brooklyn Supreme Court judge, according to a report Thursday.

Aaron Mostofsky, who told the Post Wednesday he’d come to protest a “stolen election,” was holding a police riot shield as a mob of rioters swarmed the building Wednesday.

Mostofsky is the son of Shlomo Mostofsky, a prominent figure in the Orthodox Jewish community, elected to the court last January, according to Gothamist.

On Wednesday  Aaron Mostofsky told The Post, “We were cheated. I don’t think 75 million people voted for Trump — I think it was close to 85 million.I think certain states that have been red for a long time turned blue and were stolen, like New York.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 07, 2021, 09:05:28 PM
Al Sharpton.
Almost every MSNBC host is currently a greater net negative on the world than Sharpton is right now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 07, 2021, 09:13:28 PM
Almost every MSNBC host is currently a greater net negative on the world than Sharpton is right now.
No.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 07, 2021, 09:29:09 PM
No.
Yes and I'll die on this hill.

Al Sharpton basically isn't a thing anymore. His low point was 30 years ago.

Rachel Maddow and Joy Reid are making millions of people dumber every day right now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 09:31:23 PM
Watching a Republican governor rip apart Trump’s claim that he deployed the national guard by repeated detailing that SECDEF repeatedly said no, only to eventually receive authorization by SECARM and then have the Pentagon refer all questions to a press release saying that SECDEF gave authorization after talking to VP and Congressional leaders, making no mention of POTUS in an official press release is...horrifying.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 07, 2021, 09:47:17 PM
Ilhan Omar
We will impeach!

Ilhan Omar
Most likely tomorrow.



i dont know what theyre waiting for
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2021, 09:51:50 PM
Ilhan Omar
We will impeach!

Ilhan Omar
Most likely tomorrow.



i dont know what theyre waiting for

Giving the Cabinet/Pence way too many chances to do the right thing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Libero_2 on January 07, 2021, 10:28:35 PM
Amazing

https://nypost.com/2021/01/07/nyc-man-who-breached-us-capitol-is-son-of-prominent-brooklyn-judge/


When in the hell has NY been red? Not unless NYC Seceeds from the rest of the state
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 08, 2021, 09:37:32 AM
When in the hell has NY been red? Not unless NYC Seceeds from the rest of the state

Even better is that he's from NYC. freaking idiots.

How did this carousel of clowns manage to storm the Capitol?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 08, 2021, 10:05:26 AM
https://nypost.com/2021/01/07/nyc-man-who-breached-us-capitol-is-son-of-prominent-brooklyn-judge/

When in the hell has NY been red? Not unless NYC Seceeds from the rest of the state
The Republicans didn't even run a candidate against the 'prominent Bklyn' judge.

https://brooklyneagle.com/articles/2019/08/13/judges-mostofsky-and-montalbano-nominated-for-supreme-court-in-brooklyn/

Judges Steven Mostofsky and Rosemarie Montalbano were nominated at the Brooklyn Democratic Party headquarters last Monday.

On Thursday, the judges officially received the Democratic nomination for state Supreme Court judge at a judicial convention held at St. Francis College on Thursday night. This will put them on the ballot for the general election. With no Republican challengers expected, this means both will likely be installed as Kings County Supreme Court justices in January.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 08, 2021, 10:05:52 AM
Quote
@MollyMcKew
As more comes out about the WH preventing preparation for & holding back response to the attack on the Capitol, the more I want to know about comments to reporters that White House staff were in touch with “protest leaders” and discussing their objectives. /1

Because right now it looks like Trump weaponized a mob, sent it into the fire, held back response — endangering lives of Congress, staff, police, reporters — and watched on TV hoping for — what?

What was the objective they had been hoping for? /2

I want to know about those comms. /3


what was the end game?

what is taking so long to get him out of here already? hes back on twitter doing the same excrement, egging these terrorist on again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 08, 2021, 10:06:36 AM
i copped a 7day ban on twitter for telling someone they were retarded to think this was an antifa driven event.

amazing.

i should have just tried to incite a civil war, i'd be back on twitter already.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 10:12:20 AM
When in the hell has NY been red? Not unless NYC Seceeds from the rest of the state

"Everyone I know thinks the same as me so it's incomprehensible to think that our view isn't the majority."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 08, 2021, 10:13:09 AM

what was the end game?

what is taking so long to get him out of here already? hes back on twitter doing the same excrement, egging these terrorist on again.

The only argument I can remotely see is whether removing him would be worse for trying to heal this whole divide amongst us and get him out of the spotlight.  Would removing him make him more of a martyr to these people?  Trump needs to be forgotten.  Is removing him giving him more oxygen than letting him fade away?  Like it or not, these turds are part of our population and we have to try to either settle them down or get them to realize the error of their ways.  Would it incite worse problems with these nutjobs to impeach or 25th him? 

I personally think that people are gonna be crazy no matter how he leaves and he is more dangerous in office than out of it.  He needs to go ASAP.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 10:16:03 AM
PA Lt. Governer John Fetterman is beginning a Senate campaign for 2022.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 08, 2021, 10:21:04 AM
I personally think that people are gonna be crazy no matter how he leaves and he is more dangerous in office than out of it.  He needs to go ASAP.

agreed. he can do significant damage still and nobody seems willing to stand up to him

he needs to be removed asap
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 10:30:49 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4nvNs48BCgU&ab_channel=VegasGangEnt.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 08, 2021, 10:33:50 AM
agreed. he can do significant damage still and nobody seems willing to stand up to him

he needs to be removed asap
The only important thing is political power and how they survive this.  No consideration is given to what's best.  It's what will look best for me in the future.  That goes both ways.  This is an easy decision for Democrats.  Republicans are just trying to figure out what is the best choice that keeps them in office in the future.  No need to consider right and wrong.  That's why they haven't made a decision.  They couldn't care less (freak you JE!!) about Trump staying or leaving.  It's cold but true.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 08, 2021, 10:44:20 AM
this is the perfect opportunity to split into a 3 party system

extreme trumplicans go to the trump party (we called it the PPC here in canada when they did it)
moderates can be repubs
dems can be dems and canibalize themselves
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 08, 2021, 10:49:16 AM
this is the perfect opportunity to split into a 3 party system

extreme trumplicans go to the trump party (we called it the PPC here in canada when they did it)
moderates can be repubs
dems can be dems and canibalize themselves

Trumpets, Progressives, Republicrats
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 08, 2021, 10:50:52 AM
demoncrats
trumptards
replicunts
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 11:00:10 AM
this is the perfect opportunity to split into a 3 party system

extreme trumplicans go to the trump party (we called it the PPC here in canada when they did it)
moderates can be repubs
dems can be dems and canibalize themselves

Badger says freak you, he wants his Socialist Workers' Party.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 08, 2021, 11:01:42 AM
Quote
Donald J. Trump
@realDonaldTrump
·
1h
To all of those who have asked, I will not be going to the Inauguration on January 20th.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 08, 2021, 11:06:00 AM
https://nypost.com/2021/01/08/video-shows-capitol-police-cop-getting-crushed-by-protesters/ (https://nypost.com/2021/01/08/video-shows-capitol-police-cop-getting-crushed-by-protesters/)

bLuE lIvEs MaTtEr
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 11:12:34 AM
Impeachment articles now have 131 co-sponsors, including Reps. Jerry Nadler (Judiciary Committee Chair) and Jim McGovern (Rules Committee Chair).

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1347588817189040130?s=21 (https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1347588817189040130?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 08, 2021, 11:19:05 AM
Impeachment articles now have 131 co-sponsors, including Reps. Jerry Nadler (Judiciary Committee Chair) and Jim McGovern (Rules Committee Chair).

https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1347588817189040130?s=21 (https://twitter.com/jimsciutto/status/1347588817189040130?s=21)

As embarrassing as it is, I can't see it getting 2/3 vote in the Senate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 11:20:08 AM
https://nypost.com/2021/01/08/video-shows-capitol-police-cop-getting-crushed-by-protesters/ (https://nypost.com/2021/01/08/video-shows-capitol-police-cop-getting-crushed-by-protesters/)

bLuE lIvEs MaTtEr

"A few bad apples"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 11:27:10 AM
Death count now up to 5, including a police officer.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/08/politics/capitol-police-officer-killed/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 08, 2021, 11:27:53 AM
More concrete pardon plans.  Jan 19th.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-prepares-pardon-list-for-aides-and-family-and-maybe-himself/ar-BB1cyXeC
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 11:30:49 AM
Impeach now

More concrete pardon plans.  Jan 19th.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/trump-prepares-pardon-list-for-aides-and-family-and-maybe-himself/ar-BB1cyXeC
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 08, 2021, 11:35:34 AM
https://nypost.com/2021/01/08/video-shows-capitol-police-cop-getting-crushed-by-protesters/ (https://nypost.com/2021/01/08/video-shows-capitol-police-cop-getting-crushed-by-protesters/)

bLuE lIvEs MaTtEr

I was told the cops let the protestors in
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 12:22:00 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/WG4orhu.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 12:29:37 PM
https://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/2021/1/8/22220744/illinois-republican-mary-miller-apologizes-remark-praising-hitler-trump-rally

https://www.youtube.com/watch/ZTT1qUswYL0
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 08, 2021, 12:37:54 PM
I was told the cops let the protestors in

Yeah, that seems like a weird and dangerous talking point that circulated quickly. Capital police were incredibly outnumbered and probably outgunned from the get-go, there was no winning. For the officers on the ground, it was definitely a matter of strategic where/how to make a stand to keep the politicians and themselves safe.

That being said, the compete inadequacy of the decision makers to foresee and stop it from ever getting out of hand is seriously troubling.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 12:40:53 PM
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/01/08/pelosi-trump-take-away-nuclear-codes-456529

To be clear: I do not believe that Trump is going to launch a nuclear strike, nor do I believe that Pelosi believes that. It's a fun bit of politicking though that sends a very clear message.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 08, 2021, 12:52:29 PM
Quote
Ilhan Omar
@IlhanMN
·
59m
He will be impeached. Justice will be served.

Thank you to the millions who responded to this attack on our democracy.

Thank you to the hundreds of members who heard their calls.


so can you freaking get on with it or what
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 08, 2021, 12:54:43 PM
so can you freaking get on with it or what


Gotta get the urine smell out of those offices first.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 08, 2021, 12:54:53 PM
Quote
NEWS: Richard Barnett, who was seen sitting at a desk in Speaker Pelosi’s office, has been arrested in Arkansas and charged with entering and remaining on restricting grounds, violent entry, and theft of public property -- NBC's Pete Williams reports.

https://www.businessinsider.com/richard-barnett-self-proclaimed-white-nationalist-pictured-pelosi-desk-2021-1


enjoy your 10 years in prison, dick barnett
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 12:57:20 PM
https://www.businessinsider.com/richard-barnett-self-proclaimed-white-nationalist-pictured-pelosi-desk-2021-1


enjoy your 10 years in prison, dick barnett

In the UK "barnet" is a slang word for a hairstyle. So this guy's name literally translates to "hair like a penis". Or even better, dick head.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 08, 2021, 12:59:40 PM
In the UK "barnet" is a slang word for a hairstyle. So this guy's name literally translates to "hair like a penis". Or even better, dick head.

(https://i.kym-cdn.com/entries/icons/original/000/021/267/swedish_chef.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 08, 2021, 01:19:21 PM
Lindsey Graham approached by an angry crowd at the airport in DC, ranting "You traitor."

https://t.co/usNJMMpt8B
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 08, 2021, 01:26:52 PM


what was the end game?

Find some Pym particles and win AZ GA PA?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 01:32:01 PM
so can you freaking get on with it or what


Pelosi has to call the Chamber into session.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 08, 2021, 01:32:02 PM
PA Lt. Governer John Fetterman is beginning a Senate campaign for 2022.
Thank the gods
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 01:33:25 PM
Thank the gods

If I still lived in PA I would be more than happy to vote for him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 08, 2021, 01:59:35 PM
If I still lived in PA I would be more than happy to vote for him.
..(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210108/3ff8787023abc0a71e60ae5347330d55.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 02:05:25 PM
..(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210108/3ff8787023abc0a71e60ae5347330d55.jpg)

Yeah I wasn’t there for that and I have no frame of reference for this picture aside from “Eww, Steelers.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 08, 2021, 02:08:23 PM
"One of the few things him and I agree on," @JoeBiden said of Trump's decision not to attend the inauguration.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 02:12:50 PM
Lindsey Graham approached by an angry crowd at the airport in DC, ranting "You traitor."

https://t.co/usNJMMpt8B


Imagine knowing how hated you are by both sides. Sucks to be you, Lindsey.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 02:14:41 PM
Imagine knowing how hated you are by both sides. Sucks to be you, Lindsey.

He bowed to Trump because it was convenient for him. Here are the consequences of trying to play with a fascist for convenience.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 08, 2021, 02:27:38 PM
Yeah, that seems like a weird and dangerous talking point that circulated quickly. Capital police were incredibly outnumbered and probably outgunned from the get-go, there was no winning. For the officers on the ground, it was definitely a matter of strategic where/how to make a stand to keep the politicians and themselves safe.

That being said, the compete inadequacy of the decision makers to foresee and stop it from ever getting out of hand is seriously troubling.

This is the correct take, on both points that you made.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 03:13:12 PM
https://twitter.com/RepAOC/status/1347648510787801090?s=19


EDIT: At least one Republican Senator saying he will consider whatever articles the House brings ups.

https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1347536248261517317?s=21 (https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1347536248261517317?s=21)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 08, 2021, 04:24:19 PM
So this weekend is gonna be freaking nuts if they're gonna impeach Monday.

In b4 self pardon.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 05:16:02 PM
https://twitter.com/RepAOC/status/1347648510787801090?s=19


EDIT: At least one Republican Senator saying he will consider whatever articles the House brings ups.

https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1347536248261517317?s=21 (https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1347536248261517317?s=21)



Sasse set his stall out a long time ago on Trump, I don't know why he didn't vote for impeachment last time.

Romney will definitely support this time, he knows the Mormon base has definitely moved on from Trumpism and he'll get more support by embracing a slightly more traditional brand of conservatism. I would expect other non-evangelical bases to do similar.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 05:26:24 PM
Sasse set his stall out a long time ago on Trump, I don't know why he didn't vote for impeachment last time.

Romney will definitely support this time, he knows the Mormon base has definitely moved on from Trumpism and he'll get more support by embracing a slightly more traditional brand of conservatism. I would expect other non-evangelical bases to do similar.

We'll see if Collins decides to actually do something or just say she's disappointed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 08, 2021, 05:31:08 PM
* late to the party *

I flat out hate these Trump rioters and what they did.  And Trump's conduct though this whole thing has been a disgrace.  Trump and his avid supporters need to come to grips with the fact that "it's over" and what they did in Washington was a national atrocity.   

That said, has anyone here worked the last three days besides me ya bellyaching bunch o' stiffs?    lol
 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 05:31:59 PM
He's been banned from Twitter.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 05:33:18 PM
We'll see if Collins decides to actually do something or just say she's disappointed.

Collins will do exactly as she is told to do by the RNC. As she always has.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 05:34:57 PM
* late to the party *

I flat out hate these Trump rioters and what they did.  And Trump's conduct though this whole thing has been a disgrace.  Trump and his avid supporters need to come to grips with the fact that "it's over" and what they did in Washington was a national atrocity.   

That said, has anyone here worked the last three days besides me ya bellyaching bunch o' stiffs?    lol
 


I'm on leave.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 05:35:39 PM
I'm on leave.

I'm WFH.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 05:45:01 PM
This is the kind of absolute fuckknuckle that some of your states are electing to their statehouses.

https://www.wtrf.com/news/west-virginia-headlines/west-virginia-delegate-charged-with-federal-crimes-for-storming-us-capitol/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 08, 2021, 05:52:04 PM
I'm on leave.

  Good for you (and of course thx for yr service).   : )

  (https://media.giphy.com/media/BcP30aAcTwXmRMYbhb/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 07:09:54 PM
Apple gave Parler 24 hours to introduce moderation to cut out the hate speech or they'd remove it from the App Store. Google just went a step further and didn't bother with the warning, just removed it completely from Google Play until they introduce moderation.

Must be time for Thiel to create his own mobile ecosystem tailored specifically to racists and fascists.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 08, 2021, 07:12:08 PM
They won't have enough Republicans to convict him in the Senate.  What do they need, 19 of them? Most of them either blow Trump or will give the bullshit, "it will divide the country too much to do it with only x days left".

Plus he'll be gone before the Senate can get off their asses and vote.  The only good it will do is to ban him from running again and they can say they did it.  They still should, but what would really help is something faster to stop him from freaking up more and pardoning all his excrement family and cronies. 25th.  But that isn't happening either.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 08, 2021, 07:20:10 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9126409/MAGA-mob-rioters-smeared-POO-Capitol.html

Was any of it yellow?  I have a lead.....
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 07:25:26 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9126409/MAGA-mob-rioters-smeared-POO-Capitol.html

Was any of it yellow?  I have a lead.....

True patriots.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2021, 07:30:56 PM
Not just Trump, they took down a bunch of other wingnuts as well.

https://www.nbcnews.com/tech/tech-news/twitter-bans-michael-flynn-sidney-powell-qanon-account-purge-n1253550
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 08, 2021, 07:32:58 PM
I never thought this Qanon excrement would take hold.  I thought it was too retarded.  I clearly overestimated 'murica.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 08, 2021, 08:34:48 PM
First the blue checks came for the pasta cards

https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1347732283856474115?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 08, 2021, 08:36:47 PM
* late to the party *

I flat out hate these Trump rioters and what they did.  And Trump's conduct though this whole thing has been a disgrace.  Trump and his avid supporters need to come to grips with the fact that "it's over" and what they did in Washington was a national atrocity.   

That said, has anyone here worked the last three days besides me ya bellyaching bunch o' stiffs?    lol
 


wfh baby
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 08:44:10 PM
First the blue checks came for the pasta cards

https://twitter.com/ndrew_lawrence/status/1347732283856474115?s=19

He looks like he’d call the Olive Garden an Italian restaurant.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on January 08, 2021, 08:48:39 PM
I never thought this Qanon excrement would take hold.  I thought it was too retarded.  I clearly overestimated 'murica.

i can honestly say the amount of illogical, asinine, derriere backwards excrement i've seen over the past year that have been rooted in q has been one of the most deflating things i've seen out of humanity in my life. i've brought this up before, even as recent as this summer, and some of you guys disagreed with my thoughts, but it's only become ever the clearer in recent times. i gave humanity too much credit with regards to collective intelligence
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 08, 2021, 08:50:13 PM
i can honestly say the amount of illogical, asinine, derriere backwards excrement i've seen over the past year that have been rooted in q has been one of the most deflating things i've seen out of humanity in my life. i've brought this up before, even as recent as this summer, and some of you guys disagreed with my thoughts, but it's only become ever the clearer in recent times. i gave humanity too much credit with regards to collective intelligence
Yeah but, one time LeBron James wasn't sufficiently critical of China, so, y'know, both sides
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on January 08, 2021, 08:53:50 PM
i haven't said much about it because i found some of the fvcked up excrement from the past few days to be a little bit funny like badge did, but it's quite obvious what happened and what needs to happen

trump stoked/incited that mob before they did what they did. he did little to deter them when they were doing what they were doing, and only actually denounced them after people had caught on to what may have actually happened

he holds the highest seat in our government. he holds responsibility to the citizens of this country and to his colleagues in government. his actions quite literally put the safety and the lives of his colleagues in danger for purely selfish aims due to his bruised, battered ego, and 5 people needlessly died as a result

he needs to be removed immediately
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 08, 2021, 09:27:47 PM
The following accounts have all either had tweets deleted or been suspended outright after Trump tried tweeting from them:

@realDonaldTrump
@POTUS
@thedonalddotwin
@garycoby
@TeamTrump
 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 09:33:06 PM
The following accounts have all either had tweets deleted or been suspended outright after Trump tried tweeting from them:

@realDonaldTrump
@POTUS
@thedonalddotwin
@garycoby
@TeamTrump
 

Not being allowed on Twitter might actually have a better chance of killing him than COVID-19 ever would have.

EDIT: Also, relevant:

https://twitter.com/nancyleong/status/1347722925009371137?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on January 08, 2021, 09:36:03 PM
he's trying to tweet from other fvckin accounts lmao. he can't fvckin help himself LMFAOOOOOOOO

how are you the fvcking president and allow twitter to make you look like a petulant little baby lmfaooooo. it's fcking twitter, move on
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 08, 2021, 09:45:56 PM
dunno what rush limbaugh did, but hes banned on twitter too now
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 09:59:01 PM
dunno what rush limbaugh did, but hes banned on twitter too now


Gave Cadet Bone Spur the password, probably.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2021, 10:07:13 PM
Alaska Senator Lisa Murkowski becomes the first Republican to say Trump should resign, and then openly questions her membership in the Republican Party.

https://www.npr.org/sections/congress-electoral-college-tally-live-updates/2021/01/08/955043187/i-want-him-out-alaska-republican-sen-lisa-murkowski-calls-for-trump-to-resign
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 09, 2021, 07:50:33 AM
Unironic Stan Kelly has tweeted his last over-labeled cartoon.  Sad!

(https://preview.redd.it/f33bi0mdu6a61.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=23af893ba39e5c9c0011441eb976be79e51e0e6e)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 09, 2021, 07:51:22 AM
RIP Zyklon Ben
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 09, 2021, 07:57:44 AM
https://twitter.com/Scaramucci/status/1347886612227772417?s=19

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 09, 2021, 08:59:59 AM
I can't tell whats the more unintentionally funny part of this thread, the game of who the worst MSNBC host is, the MULTIPLE stacy abrams avi's or sigs (LMAO) or supposed liberals/leftists simping for big daddy tech to have the type of control over our process that they bitched about when calling Citizens United the "death knell of democracy" or some such bullshit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 09, 2021, 09:08:29 AM
i mean, i guess 2 people is technically "multiple", altho it seems a bit much

re: twitter...private businesses can do whatever they want. if you break their rules, they are well within their right to refuse service. similar to refusing to bake a cake for a gay couple. you cant force a business to host content that violates its rules.

let me know when the federal gov has a social media platform youre banned from and ill happily support you in your fight to get back.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 09, 2021, 09:10:33 AM
I can't tell whats the more unintentionally funny part of this thread, the game of who the worst MSNBC host is, the MULTIPLE stacy abrams avi's or sigs (LMAO) or supposed liberals/leftists simping for big daddy tech to have the type of control over our process that they bitched about when calling Citizens United the "death knell of democracy" or some such bullshit.

You are consistently the most unintentionally funny part of this thread.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 09, 2021, 09:26:32 AM
i mean, i guess 2 people is technically "multiple", altho it seems a bit much

re: twitter...private businesses can do whatever they want. if you break their rules, they are well within their right to refuse service. similar to refusing to bake a cake for a gay couple. you cant force a business to host content that violates its rules.

let me know when the federal gov has a social media platform youre banned from and ill happily support you in your fight to get back.

I can't get behind the free market/private business argument given Parler being throttled and then temporarily shut down yesterday.

Gotta say, I'm not there yet with Liawatha Liz in terms of breaking them up (just allow for actual competition with their own ToS instead of banding together to try to destroy any start up/alternative company that dares to hold people to the same standard instead of becoming the new frontier for controlled propaganda), but I'm more sympathetic to her on this issue then I ever thought I'd be.

Twitter and fb aren't mom and pop shops in terms of the "bake my cake" argument, there's a difference between a sole private business and whats become the information super-highway, without getting into the fact that those bakers were sued into oblivion for making (IMHO) a business stunting decision. Put it this way-I'm doing mat for the time being. Whatever issues I have with same sex marriage (and to be clear the only issue I have with Obergfell is it doesn't go far enough), their money is green. A friend of mine from law school has built his entire practice off of it and he's living large. But they shouldn't have been persecuted the way they were when you consider that this is a situation easily solved by the free market-go to the other baker down the corner.

Expanding on your analogy, there is no baker down the corner, and every time one tries to open up, they excrement in their dough, slap their best bakers apprentice with a paternity suit and burn the building down. There is absolutely no reason according to your free-market solution why Parler can't exist without having to deal with the selective bullshit from google and apple that went on yesterday.

To be clear, I'd be saying the same exact thing if they banned the previously mentioned Stacey Abrams for calling into question the 2018 gubernatorial election as she's done time and time again. You guys can laugh now, but you're now subject to the whims of multinational corporations beholden to no one.

Trump was sued for blocking people and it was held that social media is a public forum. I'm not even saying I agree with that holding, but it is what it is. If that's the case, then forget about Trump, but the mass blocking and purging of things like #walkaway accounts is absolutely a deprivation of these people's rights.


You are consistently the most unintentionally funny part of this thread.

Don't worry, the big evil cartoonist can't get you anymore!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 09, 2021, 09:49:50 AM
my concern would be if youre starting a social media type business and the government is both trying to say "you cant remove people" and "youre legally responsible for things people post", how do you reasonably manage those 2 opposing points? it seems a bit ridiculous, unless im just not understanding the 2 points of view correctly (which is possible, im a mess of a human).


trying not to be held responsible for others actions is what lead the the removable of parler from google, if google is going to be held responsible for content posted there. they still had their web platform, and for now at least, their apple platform. so they never were really "shutdown". they tried to loophole in that their ToS said they could remove content so that was good enough. google and apple are asking them to implement the policy and practice.
i dont agree either, i dont think it should have been removed so swiftly, it was pretty clearly a knee-jerk reaction to the happenings, they should have been given a reasonable timeline to get it out. but it is what it is.

in 2021, i dont think theres a way to have a social media platform and not police it. people abuse it and you have to protect yourself as a business. this is on them for thinking they could just do whatever they want with no repercussions. youve got to protect yourself.


the trump thing was because he was using it send out official items, and the courts said since he was using it that way, he couldnt block people from viewing the messages, was it not? again, not sure on legalities, but i cant imagine because he chose to use it as a government tool to discern his messages, that it means the company cant police their own platform.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on January 09, 2021, 10:05:37 AM
the banning of content that is in any way/shape/form qanon related is a net plus for society, there is no debating this. free speech should not entail blindly accepting or allowing the propagation of blatantly illogical/untruthful/harmful propaganda by the many devious agents that have so successfully allowed for qanon filth to infiltrate our society today. it doesn't matter if he's the president; he can and should get banned just like everybody else. like badge said, regular people on twitter had suffered longer bans than he had prior to the permaban for less excrement than he had done

ill start complaining about the power they're wielding once they start to ban people from speaking outside of qanon - related cases and incidents, and it may honestly start to happen soon, but i see and have no issues whatsoever with any group or company seeing a need to stop the blatant lies and hysteria spready by qanon accomplices. this is not debatable for me. this country and our society is fvcked up, this has been made clearer than ever over the past several months and the past few days. this also is not a debate.

i'm honestly surprised these platforms have even decided to do this at this point, because it's all too little too late and the damage has been done already, and now the 'they're taking away our free speech!/they're trying to subdue us again!'/'they're trying to hide the truth!' cries have already become annoyingly unbearable
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 09, 2021, 10:16:35 AM
I can't get behind the free market/private business argument given Parler being throttled and then temporarily shut down yesterday.

Gotta say, I'm not there yet with Liawatha Liz in terms of breaking them up (just allow for actual competition with their own ToS instead of banding together to try to destroy any start up/alternative company that dares to hold people to the same standard instead of becoming the new frontier for controlled propaganda), but I'm more sympathetic to her on this issue then I ever thought I'd be.

I am 100% there, and I was before she made it a policy position. The US has a long and effective history of breaking up monopolistic positions at the right time - look at how they dealt with Ma Bell in the 80s - so quite why FAANG has been allowed to grow in such an unfettered fashion is beyond me, but it's way past time your government started wielding a very large antitrust stick in their direction and gave them the opportunity to divest or be dismantled.

As to your point on Parler, I'm not sure what your issue is there. It's not a free market argument - Google Play and the App Store both have clear rules about app content, they pull apps every day that provide or host content deemed to be contrary to their terms of service. Go onto the App Store and find something that serves content related to porn or radical Islam or any of a host of other things - it's not there. The only shame on this is that it took a bit too much sunlight for Parler to get pulled.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 09, 2021, 10:27:38 AM
One of these days MB is going to have to explain how he managed to program a random /pol/ talking point/slang generator that only barely fails the Turing Test into the board's UI.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 09, 2021, 11:09:08 AM
I can't tell whats the more unintentionally funny part of this thread, the game of who the worst MSNBC host is, the MULTIPLE stacy abrams avi's or sigs (LMAO) or supposed liberals/leftists simping for big daddy tech to have the type of control over our process that they bitched about when calling Citizens United the "death knell of democracy" or some such bullshit.
Ok. Nationalize Twitter then.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 09, 2021, 12:40:03 PM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210109/cf035ccdb56b202475609fcbaf04a6e8.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 09, 2021, 12:47:09 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210109/2ab0eb6d21a7dea43c849fffb91bca63.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 09, 2021, 12:50:49 PM
As a recent BotW beginner this made me lol

https://twitter.com/30SECVlDEOS/status/1347938551267274756?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 09, 2021, 12:52:26 PM
What is botW?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 09, 2021, 12:54:06 PM
What is botW?

Zelda: Breath of the Wild
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 09, 2021, 01:00:01 PM
Zelda: Breath of the Wild
..(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210109/54e3d38a0582e33444c7e907682a01d0.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 09, 2021, 01:17:56 PM
In the game, your character has a little stamina wheel that shows how much longer he can exert himself, if you run out of stamina while climbing you fall.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 09, 2021, 01:38:45 PM
..(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210109/54e3d38a0582e33444c7e907682a01d0.gif)

The audio and the little circle in the middle of the top of the screen and the death screen at the end are from the game.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 09, 2021, 03:34:33 PM
Hm....


(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210109/e40f92b69625487509d38d11daa8cb9b.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 09, 2021, 03:39:11 PM
Is this too subtle for the FBI?

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210109/871d826031538283e7ecb4947c21a47c.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 09, 2021, 03:46:55 PM
Is this too subtle for the FBI?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210109/871d826031538283e7ecb4947c21a47c.jpg)
It could be any Pence.  He meant goes first at the buffet.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 09, 2021, 03:54:20 PM
Will Pepe

https://nypost.com/2021/01/08/mta-worker-suspended-after-calling-in-sick-to-attend-capitol-riot/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 09, 2021, 03:55:44 PM
Will Pepe

https://nypost.com/2021/01/08/mta-worker-suspended-after-calling-in-sick-to-attend-capitol-riot/
Haha.  Pepe.  Then the pic they post makes him look like he's getting excited at a dick pic from his boyfriend.


(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210109/2b437fc182260759685468c019d88b0e.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 09, 2021, 03:57:46 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/JNhU5Tt.gif)

You get a ban!  And you get ban!  Everybody gets a ban!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 09, 2021, 04:24:42 PM
Will Pepe

https://nypost.com/2021/01/08/mta-worker-suspended-after-calling-in-sick-to-attend-capitol-riot/

something something cancel culture blah blah first amendment
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 09, 2021, 04:30:36 PM
Apparently Josh Hawley has no friends.

https://www.businessinsider.com/josh-hawley-isolated-capitol-siege-riots-electoral-college-republican-blowback-2021-1
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 09, 2021, 04:51:21 PM
Apparently Josh Hawley has no friends.

https://www.businessinsider.com/josh-hawley-isolated-capitol-siege-riots-electoral-college-republican-blowback-2021-1
What an Orwellian story.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 09, 2021, 05:06:50 PM
Bloomberg: House Republicans Ask Biden: Get Pelosi to Back Off Impeachment.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-09/house-republicans-ask-biden-get-pelosi-to-back-off-impeachment
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 09, 2021, 05:17:46 PM
Bloomberg: House Republicans Ask Biden: Get Pelosi to Back Off Impeachment.
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2021-01-09/house-republicans-ask-biden-get-pelosi-to-back-off-impeachment

You think they would have learned that it's not cool for a member of the Executive Branch to attempt to interfere with the Legislature on matters regarding who can be president.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 09, 2021, 06:44:54 PM
(https://i.redd.it/mpmyvq8tbba61.jpg)
(https://i.redd.it/5cstpx23yca61.jpg)
(https://i.redd.it/i66w3fvf76a61.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 09, 2021, 07:35:30 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/09/politics/mike-pence-25th-amendment/index.html

Pence hasn't ruled out 25th amendment if Trump becomes more unstable.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 09, 2021, 08:22:42 PM
Not sure if this was the bad apples or antifa, perhaps someone can let me know.

https://www.newsweek.com/twitter-stops-hang-mike-pence-trending-1560253
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 09, 2021, 09:00:52 PM
Apple has pulled Parler from the Apple App Store and AWS is purportedly de-platforming Parler.

 https://www.theverge.com/2021/1/9/22222637/amazon-workers-aws-stop-hosting-services-parler-capitol-violence (https://www.theverge.com/2021/1/9/22222637/amazon-workers-aws-stop-hosting-services-parler-capitol-violence)

Time for them to return to:

(https://media1.tenor.com/images/9395f7a67a86fd2716635c8439a9fe8b/tenor.gif?itemid=13935653)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 09, 2021, 09:57:32 PM
Sweet Letterkenny reference.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 10, 2021, 02:34:15 AM
my concern would be if youre starting a social media type business and the government is both trying to say "you cant remove people" and "youre legally responsible for things people post", how do you reasonably manage those 2 opposing points? it seems a bit ridiculous, unless im just not understanding the 2 points of view correctly (which is possible, im a mess of a human).


trying not to be held responsible for others actions is what lead the the removable of parler from google, if google is going to be held responsible for content posted there. they still had their web platform, and for now at least, their apple platform. so they never were really "shutdown". they tried to loophole in that their ToS said they could remove content so that was good enough. google and apple are asking them to implement the policy and practice.
i dont agree either, i dont think it should have been removed so swiftly, it was pretty clearly a knee-jerk reaction to the happenings, they should have been given a reasonable timeline to get it out. but it is what it is.

in 2021, i dont think theres a way to have a social media platform and not police it. people abuse it and you have to protect yourself as a business. this is on them for thinking they could just do whatever they want with no repercussions. youve got to protect yourself.

the trump thing was because he was using it send out official items, and the courts said since he was using it that way, he couldnt block people from viewing the messages, was it not? again, not sure on legalities, but i cant imagine because he chose to use it as a government tool to discern his messages, that it means the company cant police their own platform.

I don't disagree with a large majority of your post;

The people policing the major companies (Facebook, twitter) are clearly ideologically compromised while operating under a monopoly. There's no other explanation as to the selective enforcement in which they hide behind violations of their TOS. 

Without getting into the obvious and at this point well worn Trump banned vs Ayatollah not comparison, the multitude of examples of blue check twitter overtly violating these rules they've put in place in terms of hate speech, promulgation of "fake news", violent rhetoric towards political figures and their supporters with nary a consequence, even excrement as comparable as that jerkoff Lin Wood re: Pence could go on and on and on. The current standard cannot stand. Bree Newsome and Arthur Chu get to spread absolute insanity, but whatever one thinks of Branden Straka, his comparatively speaking completely benign presence gets deleted as if it never existed. This is how fringe conspiracy theorists get created and in their minds and that of their supporters, justified.

I don't know what to do. I don't think a repeal of section 230 is a clean solution by any stretch either. I'm nowhere near as eloquent about this as Caitlin Johnstone and I don't think she can be accused of being a right wing crackpot,

Quote
"Supporting the censorship of online speech is to support the authority of monopolistic tech oligarchs to exert more & more global control over human communication. Regardless of your attitude toward whoever happens to be getting deplatformed today, supporting this is suicidal."


ill start complaining about the power they're wielding once they start to ban people from speaking outside of qanon - related cases and incidents, and it may honestly start to happen soon, but i see and have no issues whatsoever with any group or company seeing a need to stop the blatant lies and hysteria spready by qanon accomplices. this is not debatable for me. this country and our society is fvcked up, this has been made clearer than ever over the past several months and the past few days. this also is not a debate.

You can just say you're ok with tech censorship until they come down on things you believe in or don't personally find harmless.

But you can start complaining now.

https://twitter.com/Wildman_AZ/status/1347998602161840128

I am 100% there, and I was before she made it a policy position. The US has a long and effective history of breaking up monopolistic positions at the right time - look at how they dealt with Ma Bell in the 80s - so quite why FAANG has been allowed to grow in such an unfettered fashion is beyond me, but it's way past time your government started wielding a very large antitrust stick in their direction and gave them the opportunity to divest or be dismantled.

As to your point on Parler, I'm not sure what your issue is there. It's not a free market argument - Google Play and the App Store both have clear rules about app content, they pull apps every day that provide or host content deemed to be contrary to their terms of service. Go onto the App Store and find something that serves content related to porn or radical Islam or any of a host of other things - it's not there. The only shame on this is that it took a bit too much sunlight for Parler to get pulled.

I agree with you its not a free market argument except thats constantly what I'm being told in terms of this not being a first amendment violation, "its the free market." No, its not, these are multinational corporations that during their formative years and beyond have been given massive tax breaks and grants in this country to help achieve their position, which you correctly stated is monopolized. I can't tell what's more annoying about that argument, the shifting of the goal-posts from "well if you dont like twitter start your own" to "lol look they started their own echo chamber" to "LOL START YOUR OWN APPLE" or the idea that as you identified, free-market principles are even at play here. 

If Parler can be compared to porn or radical islam, so can twitter or for that matter reddit. You can then make the argument that both should go under apple or google plays terms of service, which would be nuts, as is the banning of parler. 

But we have multinational corporations that have ultimate influence on the new frontier of how information is put out into the world, they answer to no one, they operate without any fear of competition because they can utterly destroy it, and they operate their own terms of service as arbitrarily as they want.  What could possibly go wrong?

Hm, at the end of this, I think you're right. Just break them the freak up, but I don't see given the end result of what happened to Ma Bell that FAANG would agree to such similar concessions.

FWIW, I've found parler stupid as excrement and for that matter designed like it was built by a fifth grader, but considering that facebook and twitter seem to be content given their selective enforcement of their terms of service to be echo chambers, it was only natural the "bizarro" version would pop up. Think of me what you want, but I would like to think my continued presence here lends credence to the idea that I think echo chambers are freaking stupid.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 10, 2021, 04:52:51 AM
Expanding on your analogy, there is no baker down the corner, and every time one tries to open up, they excrement in their dough, slap their best bakers apprentice with a paternity suit and burn the building down. There is absolutely no reason according to your free-market solution why Parler can't exist without having to deal with the selective bullshit from google and apple that went on yesterday.

I am 100% there, and I was before she made it a policy position. The US has a long and effective history of breaking up monopolistic positions at the right time - look at how they dealt with Ma Bell in the 80s - so quite why FAANG has been allowed to grow in such an unfettered fashion is beyond me, but it's way past time your government started wielding a very large antitrust stick in their direction and gave them the opportunity to divest or be dismantled.

I'm on board.  Congratulations FAAG (I don't think Netflix is particularly dominant) you have won capitalism's highest award: you are essential to everyone and no one can compete with you.  Hand out trophies and break them up. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 10, 2021, 07:14:42 AM


Don't worry, the big evil cartoonist can't get you anymore!

 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210110/154072c67f871fbc6662e3225ef20846.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 10, 2021, 07:44:54 AM
is that real? what the freak
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 10, 2021, 07:46:10 AM
is that real? what the freak
No
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 10, 2021, 07:49:58 AM
is that real? what the freak

No, Garrison's work isn't nearly as eloquent.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 10, 2021, 08:11:32 AM
No, Garrison's work isn't nearly as eloquent.
His pre-Trump stuff was occasionally coherent and made legitimate points, but like so many boomers, 2016 broke his brain.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on January 10, 2021, 08:51:32 AM
activists and leftists on social media have been getting banned/silenced for a long time now. i honestly wasnt even thinking of them when i made that statement because their banning has been so commonplace
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 10, 2021, 09:46:54 AM
Wtf lol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 10, 2021, 10:02:53 AM
Rep. James Clyburn said House Democrats might wait until after Biden's first 100 days to send any articles of impeachment against Trump to the Senate


freak that noise
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 10, 2021, 10:09:10 AM
Rep. James Clyburn said House Democrats might wait until after Biden's first 100 days to send any articles of impeachment against Trump to the Senate


freak that noise
It makes sense if they can't do it before the 20th, which they won't. 

When handling Senate conviction proceedings from impeachment, apparently it is basically all that can go on in Congress. Can't do much of anything else. They don't want to spend the first few weeks of Biden's presidency dealing with that excrement instead of getting to work reversing all of Trump's excrement. 

Once Biden is in office, the only point of impeachment/conviction is to bar him from running again and to have history show that he was impeached and convicted.  Doesn't really matter whether that happens day 1 of Biden's presidency, day 100 or 3 years later. As long as its before 2024.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 10, 2021, 10:11:13 AM
Trump's planning to visit Alamo, Texas, on Tuesday because apparently he and his crack team of spinmeisters think it's smart stagecraft to associate themselves with catastrophic, deadly and failed last stands. https://t.co/5ACyHDwVwj

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 10, 2021, 11:23:01 AM
Rep. James Clyburn said House Democrats might wait until after Biden's first 100 days to send any articles of impeachment against Trump to the Senate


freak that noise

I think the most realistic outcome is that Biden will use the threat of impeachment behind the scenes as currency to get cabinet confirmations.  He can present it as some Fordian reaching across the aisle bullshit that he so desperately wants to embody and Congressional republicans get out of a no-win situation.   
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 10, 2021, 01:01:57 PM
I think the most realistic outcome is that Biden will use the threat of impeachment behind the scenes as currency to get cabinet confirmations.  He can present it as some Fordian reaching across the aisle bullshit that he so desperately wants to embody and Congressional republicans get out of a no-win situation.   

hes got the senate, he dosent need excrement from the repubs
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 10, 2021, 01:55:15 PM
hes got the senate, he dosent need excrement from the repubs
Therefore a single Dem defector sinks anything
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 10, 2021, 02:03:20 PM
Therefore a single Dem defector sinks anything

You can just say Manchin.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 10, 2021, 04:08:48 PM
https://www.tmz.com/2021/01/10/new-capitol-video-trump-mob-riot-beating-fallen-police-officer

theyve got the angles in 1 spot, using tmz


why did the cops not start shooting these murderers and terrorists when they drug their victim away?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 10, 2021, 04:32:08 PM
Sisyphus meets Newton's law of gravitational force......97......98..........99......

https://twitter.com/MrToastyGuy/status/1347641025720889350
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 10, 2021, 04:39:19 PM
Just who is this "botw"?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 10, 2021, 06:24:25 PM
https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1348292557667774468?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 10, 2021, 06:32:57 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2021/01/10/politics/james-clyburn-impeachment-senate-trial-biden-cnntv/index.html


House Speaker Nancy Pelosi said Sunday the House will attempt to pass a resolution by unanimous consent Monday morning calling for Vice President Mike Pence and President Donald Trump's Cabinet to invoke the 25th Amendment and remove Trump from office -- her first time definitively saying the House will move to impeach him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 10, 2021, 06:38:33 PM
Womp womp.

https://twitter.com/angry__saint/status/1348350058861797376?s=21 (https://twitter.com/angry__saint/status/1348350058861797376?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 10, 2021, 06:41:38 PM
Can there be a bigger reason to hate this lover of the older lady?

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2021/01/10/trump-to-award-bill-belichick-the-medal-of-freedom-amid-house-impeachment-push-457248

Trump to award Bill Belichick the Medal of Freedom amid House impeachment push
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 10, 2021, 06:50:11 PM
Pelosi altering the plan.

Tomorrow: House Majority Leader Hoyer will request unanimous consent to enact the Raskin Resolution, calling on Pence and the remaining cabinet members to invoke the 25th Amendment. (Likely will not get it)

Tuesday: If unanimous consent is not achieved, the Raskin Resolution goes to a vote. After passing, Pence has 24 hours to respond.

Wednesday: If Trump is not removed via the 25th Amendment, impeachment procedures will proceed.

https://twitter.com/davidbegnaud/status/1348420705839239170?s=21 (https://twitter.com/davidbegnaud/status/1348420705839239170?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 10, 2021, 06:54:26 PM
Trump should inpeached for giving Belichick the Medal of Freedom.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 10, 2021, 07:08:50 PM
https://www.tmz.com/2021/01/10/new-capitol-video-trump-mob-riot-beating-fallen-police-officer

theyve got the angles in 1 spot, using tmz


why did the cops not start shooting these murderers and terrorists when they drug their victim away?

https://twitter.com/pattonoswalt/status/1348429853041721344?s=21 (https://twitter.com/pattonoswalt/status/1348429853041721344?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 11, 2021, 07:50:00 AM
Parler went offline at midnight this morning lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 11, 2021, 07:51:08 AM
Parler went offline at midnight this morning lol
ORWELL PREDICTED THE GOVERBMWNT WPULD TAKE AWAY MY N WORD SITE
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 11, 2021, 08:05:54 AM
Baller Status(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210111/4ac43cdbbb1fd24e3419aa9c2d9cd0a7.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 11, 2021, 08:33:23 AM
Parler went offline at midnight this morning lol

But not before communist libtard hackers were able to backdoor one of the services they were using, get full admin access, and download all of the posts, account details and verifiable contact information contained in the databases.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 11, 2021, 08:34:34 AM
But not before communist libtard hackers were able to backdoor one of the services they were using, get full admin access, and download all of the posts, account details and verifiable contact information contained in the databases.

damn Albanians
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 11, 2021, 08:35:46 AM
But not before communist libtard hackers were able to backdoor one of the services they were using, get full admin access, and download all of the posts, account details and verifiable contact information contained in the databases.

The same people worried about a microchip in the vaccine freely volunteer their name, address and DOB on a shanty internet app
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 11, 2021, 08:55:46 AM
The same people worried about a microchip in the vaccine freely volunteer their name, address and DOB on a shanty internet app

The download includes videos and photos from the failed Capitol Hill insurrection; the metadata in those files contains identifying information and GPS co-ordinates. For a bunch of society-hating weirdos who think the world is run by lizards intent on harvesting their brain tissue, they weren't half keen to share a bunch of PII.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/parler-capitol-hill-personal-data-b1785343.html?utm_source=reddit.com

Who the everloving freak uploads proof of identity to a glorified messageboard?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 11, 2021, 09:03:48 AM
The download includes videos and photos from the failed Capitol Hill insurrection; the metadata in those files contains identifying information and GPS co-ordinates. For a bunch of society-hating weirdos who think the world is run by lizards intent on harvesting their brain tissue, they weren't half keen to share a bunch of PII.

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/parler-capitol-hill-personal-data-b1785343.html?utm_source=reddit.com

Who the everloving freak uploads proof of identity to a glorified messageboard?

Wow, I was just kidding

Lmaooooo

https://twitter.com/birdrespecter/status/1348557067351519234?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 11, 2021, 09:22:43 AM
https://twitter.com/JesseDamiani/status/1348647309253476353?s=20
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 11, 2021, 09:24:15 AM
Damn, if that excrement is true, the unemployment rate in the US is getting ready to skyrocket once bosses see their retarded employees at the capitol dressed like larp Hitler.

I juet saw about them being added to no-fly lists.  Lol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 11, 2021, 09:25:28 AM
https://twitter.com/JesseDamiani/status/1348647309253476353?s=20

BOOOOOOOOOO he's my favorite part of this dystopia.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 11, 2021, 09:32:08 AM
BOOOOOOOOOO he's my favorite part of this dystopia.

He’ll just continue to do his thing a la Manish Mehta
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 11, 2021, 09:33:58 AM
He’ll just continue to do his thing a la Manish Mehta
Yep, he'll just pull up MSPaint and draw his own lawyer license.

BTW, this isn't disbarring him, just removal from membership.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 11, 2021, 09:39:17 AM
Yep, he'll just pull up MSPaint and draw his own lawyer license.

BTW, this isn't disbarring him, just removal from membership.

LOL we literally had members of the bar throwing molotovs at cop cars this summer.

I don't recall the association I'm actually forced to pay dues to taking this step.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 11, 2021, 10:00:11 AM
LOL we literally had members of the bar throwing molotovs at cop cars this summer.

I don't recall the association I'm actually forced to pay dues to taking this step.

As a member of said association, can you not raise a complaint about these members' behaviour along with the evidence of their misdoing?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 11, 2021, 10:01:59 AM
As a member of said association, can you not raise a complaint about these members' behaviour along with the evidence of their misdoing?

They have their own operating board to make such determinations and the evidence would be pretty easy to find considering it was on every backpage in the city.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 11, 2021, 10:14:37 AM
Democrats just introduced the Raskin resolution. The Republicans objected, as expected, so the house will Vote on it tomorrow at 9:00 AM. Also looks like they only submitted the article regarding the insurrection and not the article regarding Georgia.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 11, 2021, 11:32:54 AM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210111/8a5a14b786c1c6537f9bdf5dbf245c13.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 11, 2021, 12:33:29 PM
*rants about the Deep State while on a Facebook live stream documenting multiple federal criminal offenses*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 11, 2021, 02:24:21 PM
Yea so this isn’t normal.

https://twitter.com/beschlossdc/status/1348723955096580097?s=21 (https://twitter.com/beschlossdc/status/1348723955096580097?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 11, 2021, 02:30:09 PM
Yea so this isn’t normal.

https://twitter.com/beschlossdc/status/1348723955096580097?s=21 (https://twitter.com/beschlossdc/status/1348723955096580097?s=21)

Trump's dropping a deuce on Pence's house.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 11, 2021, 02:32:42 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EreirpvUYAEPSL1?format=jpg&name=medium)

lol, site's down
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 11, 2021, 02:36:02 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/EreirpvUYAEPSL1?format=jpg&name=medium)

lol, site's down

That seems like hack. Completely different format from the rest of the site. Also, no actual info on it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 11, 2021, 02:39:17 PM
That seems like hack. Completely different format from the rest of the site. Also, no actual info on it.

Yeah it's bogus.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 11, 2021, 02:41:56 PM
Text for the article of impeachment introduced in Congress today.

https://twitter.com/davidcicilline/status/1348675695078207488?s=21 (https://twitter.com/davidcicilline/status/1348675695078207488?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 11, 2021, 03:29:11 PM

 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210110/154072c67f871fbc6662e3225ef20846.jpg)

I wish I had the self control to stop laughing at this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 11, 2021, 04:13:01 PM
That seems like hack. Completely different format from the rest of the site. Also, no actual info on it.

https://www.buzzfeednews.com/article/christopherm51/state-department-website-trump-term-ending-employee
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 11, 2021, 05:16:35 PM
SBTG

https://twitter.com/Phil_Lewis_/status/1348760270198472708?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 11, 2021, 05:32:41 PM
I still can’t get over the fact that these people thought they were going to fly to DC, storm the Capitol building, over-through the legislature, execute the sitting Vice President, and then FLY HOME AND GO BACK TO WORK ON WEDNESDAY.

https://twitter.com/jimmypjones/status/1348750680148766721?s=21 (https://twitter.com/jimmypjones/status/1348750680148766721?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 11, 2021, 05:32:50 PM
SBTG

https://twitter.com/Phil_Lewis_/status/1348760270198472708?s=19

Clearly setting up for the "Soros used the 5G chip that Gates implanted in his head to make him do it" defense.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 11, 2021, 05:35:05 PM
Clearly setting up for the "Soros used the 5G chip that Gates implanted in his head to make him do it" defense.

Or the “Take whatever plea deal they offer and hope you get sentenced to the least rapey prison available, but for the love of God don’t say a freaking thing until the deal is done!” defense.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 11, 2021, 07:57:37 PM
Can there be a bigger reason to hate this lover of the older lady?

https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2021/01/10/trump-to-award-bill-belichick-the-medal-of-freedom-amid-house-impeachment-push-457248

Trump to award Bill Belichick the Medal of Freedom amid House impeachment push


It's OK, you can go back to loving Belichick now.

https://www.tsn.ca/bill-belichick-turns-down-presidential-medal-of-freedom-1.1575917
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 12, 2021, 06:59:23 AM
Pramila Jayapal covid positive after Congress lockdown

https://twitter.com/RepJayapal/status/1348871117407203328?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 12, 2021, 10:52:38 AM
I still can’t get over the fact that these people thought they were going to fly to DC, storm the Capitol building, over-through the legislature, execute the sitting Vice President, and then FLY HOME AND GO BACK TO WORK ON WEDNESDAY.

https://twitter.com/jimmypjones/status/1348750680148766721?s=21 (https://twitter.com/jimmypjones/status/1348750680148766721?s=21)

I firmly believe most of the crowd that was there wasn't intending what happened. Like podium-guy or nerd Conan. I think most of these folks showed up thinking it'd be a big gathering, an airing of grievances, and then they'd go home.

Then there were the few who had every intention of armed insurrection--excuse me, "revolution"--who were then motivated by the sitting psychopath's speech. Then mob mentality took over.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 12, 2021, 02:00:43 PM
Pramila Jayapal covid positive after Congress lockdown

https://twitter.com/RepJayapal/status/1348871117407203328?s=19

As are Rep. Brad Schneider Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 12, 2021, 02:41:38 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/01/12/pompeo-cancels-last-diplomatic-trip-as-biden-team.html

The trip later this week included a stop in Luxembourg, according to a Reuters report. However, the entire trip was reportedly canceled when officials from Luxembourg and the European Union refused to meet with Pompeo.

Lol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 12, 2021, 02:48:48 PM
As are Rep. Brad Schneider Rep. Bonnie Watson Coleman.
Yeah but they aren't as cool
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 12, 2021, 03:23:58 PM
All the reactive posturing, making political points, etc. at this point is just that: after the fact reactive.  The 64k question is why an ordained, planned event involving a large number of 'excitables' didn't have the Capitol Goober-proofed with a big "don't you even think of it!" show of force. A freaking party planner could've done better prepping for this and nipping it in the bud.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 12, 2021, 03:49:21 PM
Bernie Sanders as the new Budget Committee Chair (https://thehill.com/policy/finance/budget/533750-sanders-to-wield-gavel-as-gatekeeper-for-key-biden-proposals) is going to ruffle a few feathers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 12, 2021, 03:56:54 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/12/us/mitch-mcconnell-trump-impeachment.html

McConnell might be ready to turn on Trump.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 12, 2021, 04:05:00 PM
(https://static01.nyt.com/images/2021/01/07/us/politics/12ny-mostofsky1/07dc-protests-blog-nyc-rioter-superJumbo.jpg)

Quote
On Tuesday, the man, Aaron Mostofsky, was arrested on federal charges, part of a national manhunt by law enforcement officials to identify members of the mob that had forced its way into the Capitol.

Mr. Mostofsky, 34, is the son of Kings County Supreme Court Judge Steven Mostofsky, who also goes by Shlomo. He and his father are registered Democrats, according to New York State election records.

(https://66.media.tumblr.com/bfdaef0410b01593d00393bc26bc64e7/tumblr_ptqkovC9Oa1s9a9yjo1_400.gif)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 12, 2021, 04:12:29 PM
(https://66.media.tumblr.com/bfdaef0410b01593d00393bc26bc64e7/tumblr_ptqkovC9Oa1s9a9yjo1_400.gif)

Presumably so they can vote in the primary?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 12, 2021, 04:14:01 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/12/us/mitch-mcconnell-trump-impeachment.html

McConnell might be ready to turn on Trump.

McConnell is 78 and you have to imagine in his last term - his seat is up for vote again in 2026, so he's got one Presidential election cycle left in him. I have to think that the last thing he wants to be doing is fighting with/alongside/amongst the RNC over Trump for 2024, and he would very much rather Trump wasn't a viable influence on the 2022 midterms when he's trying to get control of the Senate back, so impeachment will be a big help to him. I'm sure it's more a matter of political expedience rather than any actual moral offense to his behaviour.

That said, I'm fairly sure that if they impeach Trump he'll just put one of the rotten goblins up for election (Eric seems to be keen to be front and centre but my guess is that they'd run Ivanka). So no matter what happens I don't think they'll be able to rid themselves of the stench of the Trump crime family, but at least if they get Donald out of the way they'll be a step further forward.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 12, 2021, 05:02:24 PM
Ivanka is the safe bet.  She just needs a felony conviction and no more problem.  No way that happens.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 12, 2021, 06:04:32 PM
The wall

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1349078262694223874?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 12, 2021, 08:05:34 PM
https://twitter.com/alexadobrien/status/1349124839274139656?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 12, 2021, 08:11:25 PM
The wall

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1349078262694223874?s=19

Good.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 12, 2021, 09:07:14 PM
Bernie Sanders as the new Budget Committee Chair (https://thehill.com/policy/finance/budget/533750-sanders-to-wield-gavel-as-gatekeeper-for-key-biden-proposals) is going to ruffle a few feathers.
Like Biden's?

https://twitter.com/rebeinstein/status/1349145049116729344?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 12, 2021, 09:35:40 PM
All the reactive posturing, making political points, etc. at this point is just that: after the fact reactive.  The 64k question is why an ordained, planned event involving a large number of 'excitables' didn't have the Capitol Goober-proofed with a big "don't you even think of it!" show of force. A freaking party planner could've done better prepping for this and nipping it in the bud.

Update:  https://apnews.com/article/riots-capitol-siege-e2bb09c0abe09f9c65cbfaf0f136c466

WASHINGTON (AP) — The FBI warned law enforcement agencies ahead of last week’s breach of the U.S. Capitol about the potential for extremist-driven violence, U.S. officials said on Tuesday, contradicting earlier statements that they were caught off guard by the assault by supporters of President Donald Trump.


So I naively bought into the self-serving "cops were caught with their pants down" narrative..smh.  Does anyone tell the unaltered truth?  This sucks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 12, 2021, 09:42:24 PM
Turtle leaning toward voting to convict.

https://www.axios.com/mcconnell-trump-convict-impeachment-trial-99246975-8c02-47f4-90d3-14a23c00afd1.html (https://www.axios.com/mcconnell-trump-convict-impeachment-trial-99246975-8c02-47f4-90d3-14a23c00afd1.html)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 12, 2021, 09:58:39 PM
https://twitter.com/breaking911/status/1349183119975440393?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 12, 2021, 10:33:27 PM
https://twitter.com/breaking911/status/1349183119975440393?s=21
Another one for the Clinton Body Count
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 12, 2021, 10:40:38 PM
https://twitter.com/duke_helena/status/1347267376488853508?s=21
https://twitter.com/duke_helena/status/1347199534301114371?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 12, 2021, 10:40:55 PM
Another one for the Clinton Body Count

Was hoping someone would read the comments
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 12, 2021, 10:51:54 PM
Was hoping someone would read the comments
I didn't even have to. I just knew.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 12, 2021, 10:56:14 PM
https://twitter.com/alexadobrien/status/1349124839274139656?s=21 (https://twitter.com/alexadobrien/status/1349124839274139656?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 12, 2021, 11:01:04 PM
https://twitter.com/richiemcginniss/status/1346959229022826498?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 12, 2021, 11:10:17 PM
https://twitter.com/alexadobrien/status/1349124839274139656?s=21 (https://twitter.com/alexadobrien/status/1349124839274139656?s=21)

https://twitter.com/drpaulgosar/status/1346865455571599363?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 12, 2021, 11:12:58 PM
https://twitter.com/drpaulgosar/status/1346865455571599363?s=21

Wow. What a well adjusted dude.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 13, 2021, 06:52:52 AM
Breaking: Rep. Mikie Sherrill says that some members of Congress led groups of people through the Capitol Building on a "reconnaissance" tour one day before the riot that laid a deadly siege on the government's legislative branch.
https://t.co/ymIRnJLAff
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 13, 2021, 08:28:15 AM
I firmly believe most of the crowd that was there wasn't intending what happened. Like podium-guy or nerd Conan. I think most of these folks showed up thinking it'd be a big gathering, an airing of grievances, and then they'd go home.

Then there were the few who had every intention of armed insurrection--excuse me, "revolution"--who were then motivated by the sitting psychopath's speech. Then mob mentality took over.

No, turns out.

https://twitter.com/ryanjreilly/status/1349348254694170626?s=21 (https://twitter.com/ryanjreilly/status/1349348254694170626?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 13, 2021, 08:45:28 AM
No, turns out.

https://twitter.com/ryanjreilly/status/1349348254694170626?s=21 (https://twitter.com/ryanjreilly/status/1349348254694170626?s=21)

Maybe, but I still think most of those idiots were just along for the ride.

What's scary is how close I was on this one:

Holy excrement.

You have to wonder what's going to happen when the "ring leaders" start facing the harsh realities. Suddenly dudes' tongues will be getting really loose. It's going to be interesting to see who gets taken down.

What the hell happened that they are referring to that people will be shocked about? It's not like I wasn't already blown away. Rape? Staff members giving specific directions to opposing party hiding places?

Because, holy excrement...

Breaking: Rep. Mikie Sherrill says that some members of Congress led groups of people through the Capitol Building on a "reconnaissance" tour one day before the riot that laid a deadly siege on the government's legislative branch.
https://t.co/ymIRnJLAff (https://t.co/ymIRnJLAff)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 13, 2021, 09:17:51 AM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1349190884592660488?s=21

Worst
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 13, 2021, 09:20:54 AM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1349190884592660488?s=21

Worst

She and Boebert are among the worst of the House members in this Congress. I hope they are expelled.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 13, 2021, 09:21:50 AM
She and Boebert are among the worst of the House members in this Congress. I hope they are expelled.

Stupid, ignorant and emboldened is a bad combination.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 13, 2021, 09:42:36 AM
https://twitter.com/AnaCabrera/status/1349374690998022150?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 13, 2021, 10:03:48 AM
I hope they are expelled.

Lol.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 13, 2021, 11:14:19 AM
The House is 13 votes away from passing HR 41, once voting is over they will have 2 hours to debate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 13, 2021, 11:41:13 AM
Jim Jordan railing against, let me see here, #cancelculture.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 13, 2021, 12:26:56 PM
I’m pretty sure Jim Jordan just reserved his time instead of letting Boebert talk again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 13, 2021, 12:33:39 PM
https://twitter.com/AnaCabrera/status/1349374690998022150?s=19
Omg cancel culture
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 13, 2021, 12:36:17 PM
Jim Jordan railing against, let me see here, #cancelculture.
Oldie but goodie.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210113/f104e922927ec0e1b1ce6a16537810e3.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 13, 2021, 12:49:56 PM
(https://i.redd.it/66o70roec4b61.jpg)

Hurry Up & Wait at its finest.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 13, 2021, 12:55:35 PM
They’re upping the total of National Guard Troops to 20,000.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 13, 2021, 12:56:02 PM
An old buddy of mine from school days joined the Royal Marines; he said that you rapidly acquire the ability to fall asleep instantly, anywhere, regardless of comfort or noise or surroundings, and then wake to your full senses just as instantly when necessary.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 13, 2021, 01:02:21 PM
Bernie has a way of keeping it simple.

Quote
Let's be clear. If Trump is too dangerous to send out a tweet or a Facebook post, he's too dangerous to be commander-in-chief.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on January 13, 2021, 01:10:19 PM
matt gaetz is fvcking shameless and literally tried to 'but the Dems!' the events that happened last week

literally the first person to politicize the BLM protests as a left-right issue was.......the president, when he started tweeting about how the BLM protests were actually antifa running around on the streets, and that became the next false torch that his culthood picked up and championed
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 13, 2021, 01:34:02 PM
https://twitter.com/meidastouch/status/1349439033848471552?s=21 (https://twitter.com/meidastouch/status/1349439033848471552?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 13, 2021, 01:35:09 PM
https://twitter.com/meidastouch/status/1349439033848471552?s=21 (https://twitter.com/meidastouch/status/1349439033848471552?s=21)
Animal Farm!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 13, 2021, 01:36:10 PM
Animal Farm!

Orwell Redenbacher's nightmare made manifest.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 13, 2021, 01:38:24 PM
Orwell Redenbacher's nightmare made manifest.
Truly the most Orsonwellesian thing of all
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 13, 2021, 03:04:42 PM
Orville Reddenbachian!! How can this be?!?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 13, 2021, 03:10:23 PM
7 House Republicans voting to impeach.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 13, 2021, 03:12:10 PM
7 House Republicans voting to impeach.
Welcome to the McResistance
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 13, 2021, 03:18:16 PM
9
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 13, 2021, 03:24:06 PM
9

10.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 13, 2021, 07:14:22 PM
Really makes you think

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210114/42c1d9374e8af43b500297ca7b42db0a.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 13, 2021, 07:22:40 PM
Really makes you think

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210114/42c1d9374e8af43b500297ca7b42db0a.jpg)

Presumably they're all landlords.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 14, 2021, 05:32:17 AM
https://twitter.com/princemarcus_27/status/1349520894264287232?s=21

Step aside Pelosi
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 14, 2021, 07:10:56 AM
https://twitter.com/princemarcus_27/status/1349520894264287232?s=21

Step aside Pelosi

AOC is stuffing dat bra
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 14, 2021, 07:12:03 AM
AOC is stuffing dat bra
Pelosi funbags? 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 14, 2021, 07:15:10 AM
Pelosi funbags? 

#motorboatSZN
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 14, 2021, 09:33:54 AM
Damn
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 14, 2021, 10:06:11 AM
https://twitter.com/princemarcus_27/status/1349520894264287232?s=21

Step aside Pelosi

Don’t let d swordz see this </3
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 14, 2021, 11:37:51 AM
Waiting for Badger's opinion on this.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/14/us/politics/jaime-harrison-dnc-chairman.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 14, 2021, 11:43:05 AM
Waiting for Badger's opinion on this.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/14/us/politics/jaime-harrison-dnc-chairman.html
He sucks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 14, 2021, 11:48:22 AM
Long answer, he's perfectly emblematic of what's wrong with the Democrats as an insitution, they are less of a political party united to advance policy goals so much as they're a jobs program for failing upwards.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 14, 2021, 11:56:43 AM
Long answer, he's perfectly emblematic of what's wrong with the Democrats as an insitution, they are less of a political party united to advance policy goals so much as they're a jobs program for failing upwards.


Is he an improvement on Perez and Ellison?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 14, 2021, 12:04:16 PM
Is he an improvement on Perez and Ellison?
Ellison >
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 14, 2021, 12:07:40 PM
The last effective DNC chair was Howard Dean whom I don't necessarily agree with everything on. Everyone after that has basically just been managing decline.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 14, 2021, 12:15:25 PM
What’s your specific gripe with Harrison?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 14, 2021, 12:24:09 PM
The last effective DNC chair was Howard Dean whom I don't necessarily agree with everything on. Everyone after that has basically just been managing decline.

Brazile and Wasserman Schulz were, I grant you, absolutely awful people. I imagine that being a party chair requires some fairly unpleasant behind the scenes work.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on January 14, 2021, 01:27:33 PM
Don’t let d swordz see this </3

i couldn't see this before because i was at work, and now the link doesn't fvckin work anymore

i just wanna see my bae
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 14, 2021, 01:42:57 PM
What’s your specific gripe with Harrison?
He's an empty vessel for special interests which is spun as "he's good at fundraising". I don't think he's an odious human being or anything, he's just a big zero for me. He's welcome to prove me wrong by reversing the post-Dean hemorrhaging of seats across the country.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 14, 2021, 01:44:57 PM
i couldn't see this before because i was at work, and now the link doesn't fvckin work anymore

i just wanna see my bae

When he tells you about the art of the prone bone:

(https://i.ibb.co/vDzwtMM/0-DF0-E6-C1-4-C3-B-4-B05-A2-CF-4-AB621-F99698.jpg) (https://ibb.co/V3BjKkk)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 14, 2021, 01:55:16 PM
i couldn't see this before because i was at work, and now the link doesn't fvckin work anymore

i just wanna see my bae

Have you seen her boyfriend? He's a pasty ginger with a neckbeard.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 14, 2021, 05:59:15 PM
Have you seen her boyfriend? He's a pasty ginger with a neckbeard.

  Speaking of someone's gingerbread avatar...

  on-topic:  Andrew Yang's running for Hizzoner - should win comfortably

  https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1349522020615278593

 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 15, 2021, 07:31:24 AM
Hell yeah

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210115/bfd51276aa2bcd95e469694e601911c5.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 15, 2021, 08:02:15 AM
How was that typed out unironically
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 15, 2021, 08:09:36 AM
How was that typed out unironically

She's. A. Moron.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 15, 2021, 08:14:47 AM
Boebert:  They may drive me to DVDA, maybe bukkake, but they will never take my guns because I'm strongest when I'm in power bottom."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 15, 2021, 09:41:46 AM
https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2021/01/14/lawmakers-capitol-attackers-legal-459519 (https://www.politico.com/amp/news/2021/01/14/lawmakers-capitol-attackers-legal-459519)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 15, 2021, 10:46:04 AM
"I'm sowwy I twied to bweak democwacy pwease don't be mad"

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1350082085449592833?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 15, 2021, 10:49:00 AM
"I'm sowwy I twied to bweak democwacy pwease don't be mad"

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1350082085449592833?s=19


I'm sorry I hit you, baby, please don't be mad at me. I promise I will never do it again! I just love you so much...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 15, 2021, 11:31:33 AM
https://futurism.com/the-byte/leaked-parler-data-capitol-attack
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 15, 2021, 11:39:42 AM
https://futurism.com/the-byte/leaked-parler-data-capitol-attack

Coming soon, to a dumbass near you....

(https://d1nnx3nhddxmeh.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/18064446/fbi-at-the-door.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 15, 2021, 11:51:26 AM
I don't know what kind of psycho would try anything crazy in DC on the 20th.  The display of force/defense there is ridiculously overwhelming.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 15, 2021, 12:00:25 PM
I don't know what kind of psycho would try anything crazy in DC on the 20th.  The display of force/defense there is ridiculously overwhelming.

It’s also going to be a major pain in the derriere to even get to the National Mall. On top of the road closures and check points, the Metro has already started shutting downs the stops in the immediate area and sevreal stops out, including a few of the major transfer stations, and those are going to continue for a few days post inauguration.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 15, 2021, 01:01:29 PM
So this is interesting. Here's video of a woman at the insurrection with a bullhorn giving very detailed instructions as to where to go and the layout of the building:

https://youtu.be/EJhP6UedNxg?t=13

Here's a picture of the bullhorn lady in the crowd on the 6th. On the right is a picture of Lauren Boebert's mother, Shawna Roberts-Bentz. Boebert gave her mother a tour of the Capitol on the 3rd, 3 days before the attempted insurrection.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErvrTOdUwAITTVV?format=jpg&name=small

I can't say definitively that those two photos are of the same person, but the likeness is striking. If that is Boebert's mother directing the insurrectionists, that's pretty damning.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 15, 2021, 01:17:59 PM
Watch the whole thing. (https://twitter.com/heathmayo/status/1349944401179496449?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 15, 2021, 01:45:53 PM
(https://i.imgflip.com/4tzg3v.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 15, 2021, 02:00:51 PM
So this is interesting. Here's video of a woman at the insurrection with a bullhorn giving very detailed instructions as to where to go and the layout of the building:

https://youtu.be/EJhP6UedNxg?t=13

Here's a picture of the bullhorn lady in the crowd on the 6th. On the right is a picture of Lauren Boebert's mother, Shawna Roberts-Bentz. Boebert gave her mother a tour of the Capitol on the 3rd, 3 days before the attempted insurrection.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ErvrTOdUwAITTVV?format=jpg&name=small

I can't say definitively that those two photos are of the same person, but the likeness is striking. If that is Boebert's mother directing the insurrectionists, that's pretty damning.

she needs to be removed immediately. what the freak.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 15, 2021, 04:00:36 PM
https://twitter.com/MattGertz/status/1350195958265557000?s=19

But no, "unity"


Remove this dude already what the freak is taking so long (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210115/3e9db6f81436f4f6f2b2329790916082.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210115/d721c20ad3bbf6b0dcd5a2678663109f.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 15, 2021, 04:23:48 PM
Anyone who supported Trump has to wear this stench like a cheap suit from here on out.  No buts, you own this excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 15, 2021, 04:48:56 PM
It’s also going to be a major pain in the derriere to even get to the National Mall. On top of the road closures and check points, the Metro has already started shutting downs the stops in the immediate area and sevreal stops out, including a few of the major transfer stations, and those are going to continue for a few days post inauguration.

  Physician heal thyself

  http://www.thejetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,5212.0.html

.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 15, 2021, 10:52:24 PM
Further proof that Tommy Tuberville is ridiculously unqualified for any for which job he’s been hired.

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/534391-newly-sworn-in-gop-senator-suggests-delaying-inauguration (https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/534391-newly-sworn-in-gop-senator-suggests-delaying-inauguration)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 16, 2021, 09:24:06 AM
Gonna check and see if my wife will tamper with my erection.
.
.
.
.
She said no.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210116/f729938088a4a2d6cfe0ce0d3f2ac864.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 16, 2021, 01:42:31 PM
And So It Starts.....
A Virginia Man, Wesley Allen Bealer Has Been Arrested At A DC Checkpoint With “Fake Inauguration” Credentials. He Had In His Possession A 9mm Glock And 500 Rounds Of Ammunition. https://t.co/759zELj1mM
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 16, 2021, 02:09:35 PM
Of course it was Virginia.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 16, 2021, 02:12:11 PM
Of course it was Virginia.
Well, it's close by.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on January 16, 2021, 02:36:48 PM
And So It Starts.....
A Virginia Man, Wesley Allen Bealer Has Been Arrested At A DC Checkpoint With “Fake Inauguration” Credentials. He Had In His Possession A 9mm Glock And 500 Rounds Of Ammunition. https://t.co/759zELj1mM

this is both frightening and disheartening

this country man
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 16, 2021, 04:42:59 PM
Hot

https://twitter.com/JewishWorker/status/1350571961399865348?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on January 16, 2021, 04:59:55 PM
And So It Starts.....
A Virginia Man, Wesley Allen Bealer Has Been Arrested At A DC Checkpoint With “Fake Inauguration” Credentials. He Had In His Possession A 9mm Glock And 500 Rounds Of Ammunition. https://t.co/759zELj1mM
Laughing at the idea of having that much ammunition with a 9mm glock

How many times were you planning on reloading?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 16, 2021, 05:04:27 PM
Laughing at the idea of having that much ammunition with a 9mm glock

How many times were you planning on reloading?

Nonce.

https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x37tuim (https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x37tuim)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 17, 2021, 08:13:47 AM
And So It Starts.....
A Virginia Man, Wesley Allen Bealer Has Been Arrested At A DC Checkpoint With “Fake Inauguration” Credentials. He Had In His Possession A 9mm Glock And 500 Rounds Of Ammunition. https://t.co/759zELj1mM
Turns out he is just a regular dumbass gun nut, not a Trumpy trying to overthrow the government.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/va-man-arrested-at-inauguration-checkpoint-says-he-was-lost-and-didn-t-mean-to-bring-gun-ammunition-to-dc/ar-BB1cON81?ocid=uxbndlbing
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 17, 2021, 08:15:12 AM
Turns out he is just a regular dumbass gun nut, not a Trumpy trying to overthrow the government.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/va-man-arrested-at-inauguration-checkpoint-says-he-was-lost-and-didn-t-mean-to-bring-gun-ammunition-to-dc/ar-BB1cON81?ocid=uxbndlbing


You guys should ban guns...it's done wonders for saving lives up in America's Hat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 17, 2021, 08:21:53 AM
Turns out he is just a regular dumbass gun nut, not a Trumpy trying to overthrow the government.

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/va-man-arrested-at-inauguration-checkpoint-says-he-was-lost-and-didn-t-mean-to-bring-gun-ammunition-to-dc/ar-BB1cON81?ocid=uxbndlbing


"Oh no, I left my gun in the car. Oh well, I'll just drive around with a gun I'm not licensed to carry into the scene of a violent attempted coup surrounded by a bunch of armed soldiers who are going to be really upset to find out about it. I'm sure this plastic badge will be more than enough to get me through this heavily fortified check point."

This was not the best decision in this man's life.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 17, 2021, 09:42:30 AM
"Oh no, I left my gun in the car. Oh well, I'll just drive around with a gun I'm not licensed to carry into the scene of a violent attempted coup surrounded by a bunch of armed soldiers who are going to be really upset to find out about it. I'm sure this plastic badge will be more than enough to get me through this heavily fortified check point."

This was not the best decision in this man's life.
No, he probably isn't going to cure cancer anytime soon.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 17, 2021, 09:44:11 AM
Quote
Rifling through Cruz's Senate desk, the terrorists find his objections to the Arizona electoral votes. "He's with us! He's with us!" one says.

https://t.co/Qli1CybPTT

This video is crazy.  There's so much you don't think about that went on during this.  Not just yelling and violence.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 17, 2021, 11:10:48 AM
Makes me sick people can still defend them after seeing this stuff.

They need to arrest all of these traitors. Every single one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 17, 2021, 01:45:33 PM
Going to be very difficult to argue that this one was an accident.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/woman-arrested-at-inauguration-checkpoint-said-she-was-officer-cabinet-member-police/2544325/?fbclid=IwAR0qqUlcOf-f4KFnEvsBqDyTSKtjYfzxmCNyKtm9aZVZ1O5I9wa-l6qchmc&amp (https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/woman-arrested-at-inauguration-checkpoint-said-she-was-officer-cabinet-member-police/2544325/?fbclid=IwAR0qqUlcOf-f4KFnEvsBqDyTSKtjYfzxmCNyKtm9aZVZ1O5I9wa-l6qchmc&amp)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 17, 2021, 01:50:22 PM
Going to be very difficult to argue that this one was an accident.

https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/woman-arrested-at-inauguration-checkpoint-said-she-was-officer-cabinet-member-police/2544325/?fbclid=IwAR0qqUlcOf-f4KFnEvsBqDyTSKtjYfzxmCNyKtm9aZVZ1O5I9wa-l6qchmc&amp (https://www.nbcwashington.com/news/local/woman-arrested-at-inauguration-checkpoint-said-she-was-officer-cabinet-member-police/2544325/?fbclid=IwAR0qqUlcOf-f4KFnEvsBqDyTSKtjYfzxmCNyKtm9aZVZ1O5I9wa-l6qchmc&amp)
Yeah, she's fucked.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 17, 2021, 08:48:53 PM
Compilation of videos taken on 1/6

https://projects.propublica.org/parler-capitol-videos/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 18, 2021, 09:15:58 AM
When you love your country so much that you steel government hardware abd sell it to a foreign power because you think it contains state secrets.

https://twitter.com/MikeSington/status/1351121428284923905?s=19 (https://twitter.com/MikeSington/status/1351121428284923905?s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 18, 2021, 09:19:43 AM
When you love your country so much that you steel government hardware abd sell it to a foreign power because you think it contains state secrets.

https://twitter.com/MikeSington/status/1351121428284923905?s=19 (https://twitter.com/MikeSington/status/1351121428284923905?s=19)

let those terrorists rebuild their gallows and use it for terrorists and traitors.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 18, 2021, 09:29:31 AM
Cool

https://twitter.com/Cecchini_DC/status/1351189407626375168?s=20 (https://twitter.com/Cecchini_DC/status/1351189407626375168?s=20)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 18, 2021, 09:31:27 AM
https://twitter.com/JProskowGlobal/status/1351187928165314563?s=20

?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 18, 2021, 09:33:25 AM
Eric and Don Jr. lit a bag of dogshit on fire but forgot to put it outside the Capitol front entrance first.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 18, 2021, 09:33:40 AM
Possible source, car fire in the Navy Yard, which would be South East of the Capitol.

https://www.popville.com/2021/01/fire-in-navy-yard-dc-smoke-pouring-out-from-under-the-highway/ (https://www.popville.com/2021/01/fire-in-navy-yard-dc-smoke-pouring-out-from-under-the-highway/)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 18, 2021, 09:34:39 AM
Sounds like a hobo's camp went up in flames
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 18, 2021, 09:37:48 AM
Looks like the fire is right on the perimeter for the green zone.

National Guard would be on the alert for any potential threat and this would qualify.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 18, 2021, 09:39:16 AM
Bad day for this guy. It's right above the train tracks leading into Union Station. That'll likely shutdown train traffic until it's out.

https://twitter.com/kouskousVPI/status/1351187923371229195?s=20
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 18, 2021, 09:45:47 AM
im more surprised they let the homeless guy live there still through all this excrement
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 18, 2021, 09:46:20 AM
im more surprised they let the homeless guy live there still through all this excrement

Where else is he supposed to go?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 18, 2021, 09:47:34 AM
Where else is he supposed to go?

some other overpass, i dont know.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 18, 2021, 09:53:11 AM
There are homeless camps under a lot of overpasses in the city. The DC city government has two solutions for this: leave it there or wait until they leave for a bit and then show up with a truck and throw out everyone’s excrement leaving them with nothing.

To top it off, a lot of shelters were also located inside the green zone which are now mostly closed or at extremely limited capacity until they loosen security around the Capitol area.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 18, 2021, 10:29:32 AM
Sounds like a hobo's camp went up in flames
Biden's America
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 18, 2021, 10:30:09 AM
Biden's America

lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 18, 2021, 10:32:30 AM
Where else is he supposed to go?

Cato's condo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 18, 2021, 10:34:24 AM
Biden's America
They are probably homeless because their capital gains tax rate is too high. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 18, 2021, 10:37:02 AM
They are probably homeless because their capital gains tax rate is too high. 

If only they invested in race horses instead of draft horses.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 18, 2021, 11:14:08 AM
george bushdonald trump does not care about hobo people
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 19, 2021, 11:44:07 AM
Turtle gon convict.

Quote
Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell, R-Ky., said Tuesday on the Senate floor that the rioters who stormed the Capitol on Jan. 6 were "fed lies" and were "provoked" by Trump and others.

"The last time the Senate convened we had just reclaimed the Capitol from violent criminals who tried to stop Congress from doing our duty. The mob was fed lies," McConnell said.

"They were provoked by the president and other powerful people, and they tried to use fear and violence to stop a specific proceeding of the first branch of the federal government, which they did not like," he added.

McConnell also acknowledged that the House has impeached Trump and that the Senate is waiting for the lower chamber to transmit the article so that a trial can begin.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 19, 2021, 01:28:48 PM
Seditiontracker.com is my new home page
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 19, 2021, 01:34:13 PM
Seditiontracker.com is my new home page

why? you live in Canada.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 19, 2021, 01:36:28 PM
why? you live in Canada.
Yes?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 19, 2021, 01:37:10 PM
Yes?

Sedition doesn't happen here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 19, 2021, 01:38:22 PM
Sedition doesn't happen here.
It's a webpage listing all the terrorists that are getting charged for their roles.

Are you ok?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 19, 2021, 01:39:41 PM
It's a webpage listing all the terrorists that are getting charged for their roles.

Are you ok?

Of course...but you don't need to involve yourself in that. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 19, 2021, 01:41:30 PM
Of course...but you don't need to involve yourself in that.
k
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 19, 2021, 01:42:05 PM
k

Canada will protect you, i promise.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 19, 2021, 02:36:57 PM
The 3rd one down on the https://seditiontracker.com lineup of terrorists is Gina Bisignano, an over-the-hill guidette & Beverly Hills Salon Owner   

https://ginaseyelashesandskin.com

Beverly Hills Terrorist

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 19, 2021, 03:01:45 PM
I can't remember if I posted it but I think it's worth posting twice just in case.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210119/d46b3c8dac56bf59da39f04f5c0492ee.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 19, 2021, 03:03:58 PM
Turtle gon convict.


It's the smartest thing for the Republicans to do.  Rip the band-aid off and put an end to Trump's campaigning once and for all.  The Trumpets will swear up and down that Mitch and Co. are traitors and they'll never forgive them, but they'll forget all about it by midterms after two years of Democrat rule. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 20, 2021, 09:43:51 AM
https://twitter.com/pissduggery/status/1351547127999066119?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 20, 2021, 09:50:59 AM
I can't remember if I posted it but I think it's worth posting twice just in case.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210119/d46b3c8dac56bf59da39f04f5c0492ee.jpg)

Don’t think I saw the selfie stick the first time I saw this lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 20, 2021, 09:55:10 AM
https://twitter.com/williamlegate/status/1351895546412335106?s=19 (https://twitter.com/williamlegate/status/1351895546412335106?s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 20, 2021, 10:16:07 AM
Happy Inauguration Day my american broskis
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 20, 2021, 10:20:23 AM
Bernie is wearing his coat from his fundraising video.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 20, 2021, 10:24:06 AM
Happy Inauguration Day my american broskis

Day 1 of wiping the excrement off ourselves and climbing back to just being the kid that smells like farts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 20, 2021, 10:24:52 AM
Day 1 of wiping the excrement off ourselves and climbing back to just being the kid that smells like farts.

DudeWipesSZN
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on January 20, 2021, 11:15:39 AM
https://twitter.com/morganfmckay/status/1351934178493935620?s=20

lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 20, 2021, 11:17:14 AM
https://twitter.com/morganfmckay/status/1351934178493935620?s=20

lol

Have fun.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 20, 2021, 11:28:50 AM
https://twitter.com/morganfmckay/status/1351934178493935620?s=20

lol
Would be funny if 10 cops showed up and stood between him and the fence and just stared at him for 10 minutes like he was a threat, then sprayed him with bear mace and high-fived each other as they left.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 20, 2021, 11:31:18 AM
Al Gore is unable to attend the inauguration as he is still trapped in the Moon prison he was banished to by the Supreme Court in Bush v. Gore https://t.co/DTCMza1xFt
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 20, 2021, 11:58:56 AM
Hey Alio

Reminder that Ajit Pai is clearing out his desk today.

You're welcome.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 20, 2021, 01:53:52 PM
The New York Times: QAnon believers struggle with inauguration..
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/20/technology/qanon-inauguration.html

Quote
Some QAnon believers tried to rejigger their theories to accommodate a transfer of power to Mr. Biden. Several large QAnon groups discussed on Wednesday the possibility that they had been wrong about Mr. Biden, and that the incoming president was actually part of Mr. Trump’s effort to take down the global cabal.
“The more I think about it, I do think it’s very possible that Biden will be the one who pulls the trigger,” one account wrote in a QAnon channel on the messaging app.


Lol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 20, 2021, 02:24:39 PM
Lmao Drain the Swamp by putting Biden into office
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 20, 2021, 02:27:05 PM
Lmao Drain the Swamp by putting Biden into office
12D chess
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 20, 2021, 03:11:51 PM
DC Statehood now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on January 20, 2021, 04:05:06 PM
Hey Alio

Reminder that Ajit Pai is clearing out his desk today.

You're welcome.

Oh yeah!

I had completely forgotten this and now this day is 10x better!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 20, 2021, 05:24:28 PM
Cory got no chill.

https://twitter.com/corybooker/status/1352031426204590081?s=21 (https://twitter.com/corybooker/status/1352031426204590081?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 21, 2021, 10:43:25 AM
https://okcfox.com/news/local/oklahoma-rep-files-bill-to-establish-bigfoot-hunting-season
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 21, 2021, 10:45:30 AM
https://okcfox.com/news/local/oklahoma-rep-files-bill-to-establish-bigfoot-hunting-season

Policy origin:
https://extrafabulouscomics.com/comic/210/ (https://extrafabulouscomics.com/comic/210/)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 21, 2021, 10:55:50 AM
Geoff Bennett
@GeoffRBennett
NEWS: Sen. Durbin tells @GarrettHaake that the hold up on a power-sharing agreement between Senate Democrats and Republicans is McConnell's desire to lock in no changes to the legislative filibuster in the next two years.



i believe it was the republicans talking about a divine mandate from the people by giving them control of the senate, house, and president. lets use it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 21, 2021, 10:58:53 AM
https://okcfox.com/news/local/oklahoma-rep-files-bill-to-establish-bigfoot-hunting-season


the rep is a little soy boy who wants to shoot tall people who can grow a real beard
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 21, 2021, 12:17:43 PM
https://okcfox.com/news/local/oklahoma-rep-files-bill-to-establish-bigfoot-hunting-season

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c8/Humphrey%2C_Justin.jpg/192px-Humphrey%2C_Justin.jpg)
Rep. Goober looks like he means business!

Besides, outside of some behemoth playing low post for the OKC Thunder being suddenly at-risk, why not a Sasquatch hunting season?  If it ends up 'bareing fruit' it least it would finally do away with those "Searching for Bigfoot" teaser shows on Discovery which invariably end up as a 57 minute ("omg, did you hear that?!!" *break to commercial*) tease only to prrrrt at the end as a big nothing burger. 

edit: shows that suckers like me get roped into watching.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 21, 2021, 12:24:16 PM
Geoff Bennett
@GeoffRBennett
NEWS: Sen. Durbin tells @GarrettHaake that the hold up on a power-sharing agreement between Senate Democrats and Republicans is McConnell's desire to lock in no changes to the legislative filibuster in the next two years.



i believe it was the republicans talking about a divine mandate from the people by giving them control of the senate, house, and president. lets use it

He's threatening to filibuster as a result. It's like he's asking the Dems to take it away.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 21, 2021, 12:38:44 PM
https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1352212061552586756?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 21, 2021, 12:46:04 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c8/Humphrey%2C_Justin.jpg/192px-Humphrey%2C_Justin.jpg)
Rep. Goober looks like he means business!

Besides, outside of some behemoth playing low post for the OKC Thunder being suddenly at-risk, why not a Sasquatch hunting season?  If it ends up 'bareing fruit' it least it would finally do away with those "Searching for Bigfoot" teaser shows on Discovery which invariably end up as a 57 minute ("omg, did you hear that?!!" *break to commercial*) tease only to prrrrt at the end as a big nothing burger. 

edit: shows that suckers like me get roped into watching.
I enjoy a nice bolo tie.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 21, 2021, 12:49:52 PM
I enjoy a nice bolo tie.
Me too.

(https://sports.cbsimg.net/images/blogs/philip-rivers-bolo-tie-bengals-win.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 21, 2021, 01:04:03 PM
https://twitter.com/GretaThunberg/status/1352212061552586756?s=19

queeeeeeeeen



i'm loving her little digs, great freaking job
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on January 21, 2021, 01:05:26 PM
ted cruz really said that the US cares more about the citizens of paris than america by re-joining the paris climate agreement

my fvcking god
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 21, 2021, 01:12:38 PM
Ted Cruz knows exactly why it's called The Paris Agreement.  He also knows what his base thinks it means.  He's pandering.  He's an odious little hair-covered wad of used chewing gum.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 21, 2021, 01:20:17 PM
Ted Cruz knows exactly why it's called The Paris Agreement.  He also knows what his base thinks it means.  He's pandering.  He's an odious little hair-covered wad of used chewing gum.

This. He treats his constituents like idiots every chance he gets.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 21, 2021, 01:51:12 PM
ted cruz really said that the US cares more about the citizens of paris than america by re-joining the paris climate agreement

my fvcking god

You mean the massive foreign aid bill that has no appreciable effect on its stated purpose? That bill?

Ted Cruz knows exactly why it's called The Paris Agreement.  He also knows what his base thinks it means.  He's pandering.  He's an odious little hair-covered wad of used chewing gum.

He’s not pandering at all. It’s a multinational agreement, otherwise defined as a treaty.

It’s being illegally entered into again. Trump deserves part of the blame.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 21, 2021, 02:34:31 PM
Pramila feeling fine.

https://twitter.com/repjayapal/status/1352318136721276939?s=21 (https://twitter.com/repjayapal/status/1352318136721276939?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 21, 2021, 03:20:57 PM
https://twitter.com/carterforva/status/1352331635807629314?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 21, 2021, 03:21:07 PM
Pramila feeling fine.

https://twitter.com/repjayapal/status/1352318136721276939?s=21 (https://twitter.com/repjayapal/status/1352318136721276939?s=21)
Nice. Wish she was speaker.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 21, 2021, 03:28:00 PM
https://twitter.com/carterforva/status/1352331635807629314?s=19
Lee Carter is probably my favorite politician in the US.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 21, 2021, 03:32:41 PM
https://twitter.com/carterforva/status/1352331635807629314?s=19

https://twitter.com/rossputman/status/1352332084761620480?s=21 (https://twitter.com/rossputman/status/1352332084761620480?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 21, 2021, 04:45:49 PM
Parler vs Amazon is going as predicted.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-amazon-com-parler/parler-loses-bid-to-require-amazon-to-restore-service-idUSKBN29Q2T3

Curious who is funding any kind of legal action on Parler's behalf. I don't see how they can possibly hope to force a service to host them, so I'm not sure what their end game is here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 21, 2021, 04:48:29 PM
Parler vs Amazon is going as predicted.

https://www.reuters.com/article/us-amazon-com-parler/parler-loses-bid-to-require-amazon-to-restore-service-idUSKBN29Q2T3

Curious who is funding any kind of legal action on Parler's behalf. I don't see how they can possibly hope to force a service to host them, so I'm not sure what their end game is here.
If they yell "1984" enough times in front of a judge it might just work.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 21, 2021, 04:52:14 PM
If they yell "1984" enough times in front of a judge it might just work.

It might have been more fun if Amazon had used the defense of "we believe that Parler has some users who are gay and it's against our religious beliefs to host such things".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 21, 2021, 04:56:02 PM
This is Charlotte's Web all over!!!!1!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 21, 2021, 07:09:41 PM
https://twitter.com/franklinleonard/status/1352331611736518662?s=21 (https://twitter.com/franklinleonard/status/1352331611736518662?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 21, 2021, 07:11:13 PM
Biden's press secretary is giving Pelosi funbags a run for her money.

(https://images.c-span.org/Files/526/20150316131907012_hd.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 21, 2021, 07:16:06 PM
Biden's press secretary is giving Pelosi funbags a run for her money.

(https://images.c-span.org/Files/526/20150316131907012_hd.jpg)
Strawberry Quik titties
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 21, 2021, 07:48:29 PM
Strawberry Quik titties
(https://pics.me.me/strawberry-boob-strawberry-milk-anyone-strawberry-boob-2862774.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 21, 2021, 07:54:30 PM
Yeah so this isn’t cool.

https://twitter.com/natashabertrand/status/1352412092058492929?s=21 (https://twitter.com/natashabertrand/status/1352412092058492929?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 21, 2021, 08:05:13 PM
Yeah so this isn’t cool.

https://twitter.com/natashabertrand/status/1352412092058492929?s=21 (https://twitter.com/natashabertrand/status/1352412092058492929?s=21)
A bit misleading.  They aren't sleeping outside, they are taking shift breaks in the parking garage.  Still shitty, but the tweet makes it seem like they are sleeping all night outside.  The issue is they have limited bathrooms and they should at least have a warm place to take breaks for all they are doing to protect us.  Crappy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 21, 2021, 08:08:11 PM
A bit misleading.  They aren't sleeping outside, they are taking shift breaks in the parking garage.  Still shitty, but the tweet makes it seem like they are sleeping all night outside.  The issue is they have limited bathrooms and they should at least have a warm place to take breaks for all they are doing to protect us.  Crappy.

Yeah, I read the article. Still not cool. They could easily find indoor spots for them with better bathroom accommodations. Like any of the closed, heated museums on the Mall.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 21, 2021, 08:08:54 PM
Yeah so this isn’t cool.

https://twitter.com/natashabertrand/status/1352412092058492929?s=21 (https://twitter.com/natashabertrand/status/1352412092058492929?s=21)

Why are they still even deployed? 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 21, 2021, 08:10:58 PM
Quote
But about 7,000 troops will remain through the end of the month, he said.

“Some agencies are requesting continuity of operations, additional support and recuperation time for their forces to regroup. Approximately 7,000 National Guard personnel are anticipated to provide that assistance through the end of the month,” said Murphy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 21, 2021, 08:14:57 PM
Why are they still even deployed? 

No idea. I’m guessing that they’ll start getting detached as the security barriers get rolled back.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 22, 2021, 09:24:15 AM
Quote
Brad Parscale
@parscale
Maybe it was a mistake to end the Fairness Doctrine. Should it be brought back and extended to cable news

Maybe you're right for once, mr.parscale!

goodbye fox news, cnn, oann, newsmax, msnbc...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2021, 09:26:37 AM
Maybe you're right for once, mr.parscale!

goodbye fox news, cnn, oann, newsmax, msnbc...

They're "entertainment" channels.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 22, 2021, 09:30:11 AM
Maybe you're right for once, mr.parscale!

goodbye fox news, cnn, oann, newsmax, msnbc...

All news channels = Reuters
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 23, 2021, 06:32:11 AM
mcconnel has his side in a funny spot with this filibuster stuff. if the dems get rid of the filibuster and use it to get 2k checks out and to raise minimum wage and get rid of student loan debt, nobody is gonna give a freak in 2022 about the filibuster...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 23, 2021, 01:36:39 PM
Get this man in the Senate.

https://twitter.com/johnfetterman/status/1353014591106797571?s=21 (https://twitter.com/johnfetterman/status/1353014591106797571?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 23, 2021, 04:08:09 PM
(https://i.redd.it/y2w12a2q64d61.jpg)

That's great.  But I'm sick of this meme and it needs to go away now. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 23, 2021, 04:18:04 PM
(https://i.redd.it/y2w12a2q64d61.jpg)

That's great.  But I'm sick of this meme and it needs to go away now.

Here

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210123/d99357c39f61d3317eceff2763da3dc7.jpg)

EDIT: Formatting
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 23, 2021, 06:42:59 PM
LMAO insurrection! freaking piece of excrement.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/conspiracy-oath-keeper-arrest-capitol-riot/2021/01/19/fb84877a-5a4f-11eb-8bcf-3877871c819d_story.html (https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/legal-issues/conspiracy-oath-keeper-arrest-capitol-riot/2021/01/19/fb84877a-5a4f-11eb-8bcf-3877871c819d_story.html)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 25, 2021, 08:15:48 PM
Unity and bipartisanship are not policy goals

https://twitter.com/ThePlumLineGS/status/1353837256696606720?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on January 26, 2021, 01:34:07 PM
(https://i.redd.it/y2w12a2q64d61.jpg)

That's great.  But I'm sick of this meme and it needs to go away now.
SOCIALISM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 26, 2021, 01:42:12 PM
I think it's great that he generated so much money for a good cause off the back of the meme, but I reserve the right to judge very harshly anyone I see wearing one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 26, 2021, 03:52:03 PM
  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/01/26/us/portland-mayor-ted-wheeler-pepper-spray.html

 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 26, 2021, 08:28:02 PM
https://m.imgur.com/gallery/YXdP4SC (https://m.imgur.com/gallery/YXdP4SC)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 27, 2021, 01:04:43 PM
Bill for DC Statehood has been introduced in the Senate. LFG!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 27, 2021, 01:44:17 PM
Bill for DC Statehood has been introduced in the Senate. LFG!!!
Ensuring a population center is appropriately represented? That's socialism.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on January 27, 2021, 02:56:24 PM
Looking forward to a vote that will probly be along party lines
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 27, 2021, 03:02:04 PM
Looking forward to a vote that will probly be along party lines

100% guaranteed every Republican will oppose it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 27, 2021, 03:36:11 PM
100% guaranteed every Republican will oppose it.
Cubazuela
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 27, 2021, 04:02:28 PM
https://truthout.org/articles/house-may-expel-qanon-lawmaker-marjorie-taylor-greene-dem-congressman-says/

Frazzledrip is a new one to me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 27, 2021, 04:52:50 PM
https://truthout.org/articles/house-may-expel-qanon-lawmaker-marjorie-taylor-greene-dem-congressman-says/

Frazzledrip is a new one to me.

Boogaloo, pizzagate, frazzledrip... I love that QAnon are firmly committed to finding names for their conspiracies/movements that match the absurdity of their content.

Stay tuned for the upcoming "Joe Biden is a malfunctioning cultist robot from the future" theory: Quidbiloofolloopeysklountz.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 27, 2021, 05:02:48 PM
100% guaranteed every Republican will oppose it.

Article 1, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution says Congress should be in charge of the seat of government, which will be a "District (not exceeding ten Miles square)."

So, they can either do what many would love to do: change the U.S. Constitution. 
Or, why not simply (if slyly) shrink the size of the "federal district" to the area just around the National Mall, the White House and Capitol Hill in order to make a state out of the bulk of the city. There would still be a district, but there would also be a new state (read: 52-50).

And then?  Puerto Rico! 54-50.
And then?  The world!....yeeeaaahhh!!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDwODbl3muE

fwiw: 64% of Americans oppose it (2019 Gallup poll): https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/15/us/gallup-poll-dc-statehood-trnd/index.html


https://truthout.org/articles/house-may-expel-qanon-lawmaker-marjorie-taylor-greene-dem-congressman-says/

Frazzledrip is a new one to me.
Forget the qanon chick for a second.........  'Truthout?'   Truthout??   hahaha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 27, 2021, 05:42:54 PM

Forget the qanon chick for a second.........  'Truthout?'   Truthout??   hahaha

I honestly don't know who they are, but they look pretty left wing. (I saw the link on Reddit.) That said, the story reads as pretty fact-based, and it doesn't really require any political bias to make Greene look like an absolute headcase - her own words do a far better job of that than any journalist.

So no, don't let's forget the "QAnon chick" to focus on the source for a second. It's not really relevant at all, unless you can point to something in that article that reads in any way like selective or embellished quoting and/or sourcing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 27, 2021, 06:02:19 PM
I honestly don't know who they are, but they look pretty left wing. (I saw the link on Reddit.) That said, the story reads as pretty fact-based, and it doesn't really require any political bias to make Greene look like an absolute headcase - her own words do a far better job of that than any journalist.

So no, don't let's forget the "QAnon chick" to focus on the source for a second. It's not really relevant at all, unless you can point to something in that article that reads in any way like selective or embellished quoting and/or sourcing.

'Just for a second' JE, just for a second.   No one suggested ignoring the loon altogether.  Further, I don't care if "Truthout" is center-left or left or far-left, I was (just for a second) expressing mild amusement at their 'righteous' bannerhead.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 28, 2021, 12:58:05 AM

Article 1, Section 8, of the U.S. Constitution says Congress should be in charge of the seat of government, which will be a "District (not exceeding ten Miles square)."

So, they can either do what many would love to do: change the U.S. Constitution. 
Or, why not simply (if slyly) shrink the size of the "federal district" to the area just around the National Mall, the White House and Capitol Hill in order to make a state out of the bulk of the city. There would still be a district, but there would also be a new state (read: 52-50).

And then?  Puerto Rico! 54-50.
And then?  The world!....yeeeaaahhh!!!!!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KDwODbl3muE

fwiw: 64% of Americans oppose it (2019 Gallup poll): https://www.cnn.com/2019/07/15/us/gallup-poll-dc-statehood-trnd/index.html

Forget the qanon chick for a second.........  'Truthout?'   Truthout??   hahaha

The road closures and barricades around the Capitol and White House prove how easy it is to draw that distinction.

Congress hasn't been the administrator for the city in decades and that city has a population greater than Vermont or Wyoming that lacks voting representation in the House and any representation in the Senate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 28, 2021, 01:44:14 PM
The Republicans nominated Taylor-Greene to the Education Committee. They're just trolling now, aren't they?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 28, 2021, 10:28:44 PM
Jewish space lasers are the cause of wildfires (https://nymag.com/intelligencer/article/marjorie-taylor-greene-qanon-wildfires-space-laser-rothschild-execute.html)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 29, 2021, 04:05:19 AM
Rooney rule for everybody

https://www.google.com/amp/s/kotaku.com/report-activision-blizzard-calls-policy-to-make-hiring-1846144994/amp
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 29, 2021, 05:23:45 AM
Rooney rule for everybody

https://www.google.com/amp/s/kotaku.com/report-activision-blizzard-calls-policy-to-make-hiring-1846144994/amp
Marvin Lewis is gonna get a lot of interviews to develop video games.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 29, 2021, 05:40:56 AM
Industry: Interview more BIPOC candidates for jobs.

Activision Blizzard: We can’t work under these conditions!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 29, 2021, 06:46:55 AM
Industry: Interview more BIPOC candidates for jobs.

Activision Blizzard: We can’t work under these conditions!!!
This is exactly like Moby Dick!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 29, 2021, 02:26:23 PM
Good news, everyone!

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/zuckerberg-facebook-violence-capitol-riot-b1794059.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 29, 2021, 02:42:21 PM
Good news, everyone!

https://www.independent.co.uk/life-style/gadgets-and-tech/zuckerberg-facebook-violence-capitol-riot-b1794059.html

(https://64.media.tumblr.com/409a42ca343f096f86b156c15bc82c09/tumblr_inline_o4zk4qJHAc1r5p2sp_1280.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 29, 2021, 03:05:23 PM
Missouri just passed Bill 66 in their State Senate, which contains this particular doozy:

Quote
LIABILITY FOR MOTOR VEHICLE DRIVERS DURING A PROTEST (Section 537.570)

This act provides that a person operating a motor vehicle shall not be liable for injuries to another person who blocks traffic if such person was exercising due care and was not grossly negligent.

As well as this one:

Quote
USE OF FORCE DURING PROTESTS (Section 563.031)

This act provides that a person may use deadly force against another person if such force is used against a person who is participating in an unlawful assembly and unlawfully enters or attempts to enter private property that is owned or leased by an individual.

https://www.senate.mo.gov/21info/bts_web/Bill.aspx?SessionType=R&BillID=54250840

So if you're protesting and impede traffic, people who disagree with you are free to run you over. And if you step on their lawn, don't complain if you're shot and killed as they will face no liability.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 29, 2021, 06:58:15 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/QAnonCasualties/comments/l81rls/im_a_local_news_reporter_in_des_moines_ia_and
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 01, 2021, 10:59:59 PM
lol paygo

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/ncna1256375
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 02, 2021, 10:54:44 AM
https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/1355210340582252546?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 02, 2021, 12:01:48 PM
https://www.thedailybeast.com/capitol-rioter-jenny-cudd-asks-court-to-let-her-vacation-in-mexico?via=twitter_page (https://www.thedailybeast.com/capitol-rioter-jenny-cudd-asks-court-to-let-her-vacation-in-mexico?via=twitter_page)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 02, 2021, 12:11:08 PM
https://www.thedailybeast.com/capitol-rioter-jenny-cudd-asks-court-to-let-her-vacation-in-mexico?via=twitter_page (https://www.thedailybeast.com/capitol-rioter-jenny-cudd-asks-court-to-let-her-vacation-in-mexico?via=twitter_page)
Lol.  That said, I won't be shocked to see it Ok'd because it makes no sense.  Same with the dude that got organic food in jail.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 02, 2021, 03:02:55 PM
Mayorkas and Buttigieg confirmed as Homeland Security and Transportation Secs, respectively.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 03, 2021, 07:20:04 AM
So sad to see your loved ones fade away mentally

https://twitter.com/TheOnion/status/1356671327688667138?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 03, 2021, 08:32:41 AM
https://twitter.com/oliverdarcy/status/1355210340582252546?s=19

As if Darcy doesn't say more malignant and dehumanizing things about his political opposites on a daily basis.

Who the freak is he kidding.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 03, 2021, 08:37:17 AM
Federal judge in Texas lets white insurrectionist woman go on vacation in Mexico before trial.

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/4358889001 (https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/4358889001)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 03, 2021, 08:57:02 AM
Federal judge in Texas lets white insurrectionist woman go on vacation in Mexico before trial.

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/4358889001 (https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/4358889001)
Every time I travel somewhere, there's a question on the immigration form as to whether I've ever tried to overthrow a government. Wonder how she'll answer that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 03, 2021, 09:02:52 AM
Every time I travel somewhere, there's a question on the immigration form as to whether I've ever tried to overthrow a government. Wonder how she'll answer that.

Probably a regurgitation of her “I did nothing wrong!” argument.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 03, 2021, 09:19:40 AM
Federal judge in Texas lets white insurrectionist woman go on vacation in Mexico before trial.

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/4358889001 (https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/4358889001)
Lol.  That said, I won't be shocked to see it Ok'd because it makes no sense.  Same with the dude that got organic food in jail.


Boom.  Headshot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on February 03, 2021, 10:06:04 AM
Federal judge in Texas lets white insurrectionist woman go on vacation in Mexico before trial.

https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/4358889001 (https://amp.usatoday.com/amp/4358889001)

Meanwhile...

(https://preview.redd.it/51iqj171b5f61.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=19b37312b327921866c8ed18fb376bf64a1b6ec9)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 03, 2021, 01:28:55 PM
Boom.  Headshot.

USA Today retracting their original report of the magistrate granting permission to go to Mexico in the story:

Quote
Corrections and clarifications: A federal magistrate has not granted permission for Jenny Cudd to leave the country, as indicated in a previous version of this story.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 03, 2021, 01:57:50 PM
USA Today retracting their original report of the magistrate granting permission to go to Mexico in the story:
Boom.  Unheadshot.

Her last name is Cudd.  Uhuhuh.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 03, 2021, 06:29:22 PM
Love how we've gone from a promise of $2000 checks to $1400 checks to trying to means test half of the working class out of getting the full $1400
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 03, 2021, 06:53:39 PM
Love how we've gone from a promise of $2000 checks to $1400 checks to trying to means test half of the working class out of getting the full $1400

GOP:

(https://i.imgur.com/x6I1c6v_d.webp?maxwidth=640&shape=thumb&fidelity=medium)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 04, 2021, 07:23:26 PM
Marjorie Taylor-Greene removed from committee obligations.

The vote was 230-199 with 11 Republicans voting to boot their party member.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on February 04, 2021, 08:18:07 PM
Marge quarantined.  Love it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 04, 2021, 08:42:44 PM
Marjorie Taylor-Greene removed from committee obligations.

The vote was 230-199 with 11 Republicans voting to boot their party member.

*Margery
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 04, 2021, 08:48:02 PM
*Margery

*Queynt
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 05, 2021, 03:25:54 AM
Marjoery
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 05, 2021, 06:09:20 AM
https://www.npr.org/2021/02/05/964365980/senate-passes-budget-resolution-vice-president-harris-breaks-tie
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 05, 2021, 06:50:45 AM
Good
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 05, 2021, 08:35:10 AM
John Fetterman filed papers to run for Toomey's Senate seat in 2022.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 05, 2021, 09:24:01 AM
Alexandria Ocasio-Smollett.

I'd say I look forward to about 18 months when the House flips and Republicans fight fire with fire by sending that raging queynte Rashida Tlaib off of any one of her committees for any one of a host of comparable crazy excrement that Greene currently has the focus on her for (and with good reason).

But that would require congressional Republicans not being total pussies that are horrible at the games played by the other side. Always a day late and dollar short.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 05, 2021, 10:17:53 AM
Alexandria Ocasio-Smollett.

I'd say I look forward to about 18 months when the House flips and Republicans fight fire with fire by sending that raging queynte Rashida Tlaib off of any one of her committees for any one of a host of comparable crazy excrement that Greene currently has the focus on her for (and with good reason).

But that would require congressional Republicans not being total pussies that are horrible at the games played by the other side. Always a day late and dollar short.

mj, if you're going to claim that Repubs (after flipping the House) can play tit-for-tat and kick Rashida Talib off her committees, that assumes that she's said things just as bizarre as Greene's:

- Ca. wildfires caused by a 'space beam' controlled by a Jewish banking family who bankrolls Dems.  :-o
- executing Dem lawmakers including Nancy Pelosi (like her boobs aren't immortal?).  That trumps Talib's "impeach the motherfcker."
- the "Islamic invasion" of our government (me? I welcome the 'Islamic invasion' of our head coaching ranks).

What has Talib said that's on the same bizzaro/violent level as Madge?

fwiw, the hypenated-Smollett 'Chicken Little' allusion was cute
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 05, 2021, 10:35:55 AM
mj, if you're going to claim that Repubs (after flipping the House) can play tit-for-tat and kick Rashida Talib off her committees, that assumes that she's said things just as bizarre as Greene's:

- Ca. wildfires caused by a 'space beam' controlled by a Jewish banking family who bankrolls Dems.  :-o
- executing Dem lawmakers including Nancy Pelosi (like her boobs aren't immortal?).  That trumps Talib's "impeach the motherfcker."
- the "Islamic invasion" of our government (me? I welcome the 'Islamic invasion' of our head coaching ranks).

What has Talib said that's on the same bizzaro/violent level as Madge?

fwiw, the hypenated-Smollett 'Chicken Little' allusion was cute

Assassination of Pelosi boobs is punishable by lethal injection.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 05, 2021, 10:39:23 AM
John Fetterman filed papers to run for Toomey's Senate seat in 2022.

Good
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 05, 2021, 10:45:32 AM
mj, if you're going to claim that Repubs (after flipping the House) can play tit-for-tat and kick Rashida Talib off her committees, that assumes that she's said things just as bizarre as Greene's:

- Ca. wildfires caused by a 'space beam' controlled by a Jewish banking family who bankrolls Dems.  :-o
- executing Dem lawmakers including Nancy Pelosi (like her boobs aren't immortal?).  That trumps Talib's "impeach the motherfcker."
- the "Islamic invasion" of our government (me? I welcome the 'Islamic invasion' of our head coaching ranks).

What has Talib said that's on the same bizzaro/violent level as Madge?

fwiw, the hypenated-Smollett 'Chicken Little' allusion was cute

Couldn't help myself.

Anyway, as insane as Jewish space lasers are, I guess I don't find it as offensive as describing the systematic extermination of six million jews as calming, or that people should be barred from certain professions because of their race.

If anti-semitism is enough to get people kicked off of committee seats, there's a representative in Minnesota that should be in a great deal of trouble and that's without getting into all of her shenanigans regarding campaign finance and her brother-husband.

It's symbolic anyway, I don't see as a freshman congresswoman in a minority party what power she'd hold. But this absolutely will embolden the voters in her district to say "lol freak off, we'll fuckin do it again."

That's what I like about you though del, always willing to politely call me out on my excrement without resorting to ad hominem and viciousness.

And this place is way way WAYYY too hung up on the shriveled up raisins of a pathetic, geriatric drunk. If we're talking Dem titties give me Mama Sinema.

Quote
(me? I welcome the 'Islamic invasion' of our head coaching ranks).

 ;D ;D ;D I for one welcome our Islamic overlord and the newfound interest in Jets football from the guys at Shah's Hilal. It's made for some solid conversation while I get my fix.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 05, 2021, 11:01:18 AM


And this place is way way WAYYY too hung up on the shriveled up raisins of a pathetic, geriatric drunk. If we're talking Dem titties give me Mama Sinema.


User has been banned for disparaging Pelosi milkers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 05, 2021, 11:13:20 AM
mj thinks Omar married her brother
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on February 05, 2021, 05:11:13 PM
Couldn't help myself.

Anyway, as insane as Jewish space lasers are, I guess I don't find it as offensive as describing the systematic extermination of six million jews as calming

I mean, this is from an opinion piece published in JPost:
"But in this instance Tlaib didn’t say what they say she said. Although she is no Zionist, she acknowledged Jewish suffering and offered up a slice of understanding as to why Jews needed a homeland. It’s hardly a path to reconciliation, but it isn’t anti-Semitism either."

https://www.jpost.com/american-politics/what-did-rashida-tlaib-really-say-about-the-holocaust-589711

Her actual quote:
"Absolutely. Let me tell you — I mean, for me, I think two weeks ago we celebrated, or took a moment I think in our country to remember, the Holocaust. And there’s a kind of a calming feeling, I always tell folks, when I think of the Holocaust and the tragedy of the Holocaust in the fact that it was my ancestors — Palestinians — who lost their land and some lost their lives, their livelihood, their human dignity, their existence in many ways had been wiped out, and some people’s passports — I mean, just all of it was in the name of trying to create a safe haven for Jews, post-the Holocaust, post-the tragedy and the horrific persecution of Jews across the world at that time. And I love the fact that it was my ancestors that provided that, right?, in many ways. But they did it in a way that took their human dignity away, right, and it was forced on them."

Definitely feels like you're deliberately misunderstanding her to try and prove your brand of partisan rhetoric isn't as bad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 05, 2021, 06:15:56 PM
I mean, this is from an opinion piece published in JPost:
"But in this instance Tlaib didn’t say what they say she said. Although she is no Zionist, she acknowledged Jewish suffering and offered up a slice of understanding as to why Jews needed a homeland. It’s hardly a path to reconciliation, but it isn’t anti-Semitism either."

https://www.jpost.com/american-politics/what-did-rashida-tlaib-really-say-about-the-holocaust-589711

Her actual quote:
"Absolutely. Let me tell you — I mean, for me, I think two weeks ago we celebrated, or took a moment I think in our country to remember, the Holocaust. And there’s a kind of a calming feeling, I always tell folks, when I think of the Holocaust and the tragedy of the Holocaust in the fact that it was my ancestors — Palestinians — who lost their land and some lost their lives, their livelihood, their human dignity, their existence in many ways had been wiped out, and some people’s passports — I mean, just all of it was in the name of trying to create a safe haven for Jews, post-the Holocaust, post-the tragedy and the horrific persecution of Jews across the world at that time. And I love the fact that it was my ancestors that provided that, right?, in many ways. But they did it in a way that took their human dignity away, right, and it was forced on them."

Definitely feels like you're deliberately misunderstanding her to try and prove your brand of partisan rhetoric isn't as bad.

Definitely feels like you're affording someone a level of nuance you otherwise wouldn't given the initial next to their name, but that's pretty much what you do.

That's without getting into how freaking unbelievably weird and inappropriate the comment still is, or Omar's dual loyalty or all about the benjamins bullshit.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on February 05, 2021, 06:31:36 PM
I mean, this is from an opinion piece published in JPost:
"But in this instance Tlaib didn’t say what they say she said. Although she is no Zionist, she acknowledged Jewish suffering and offered up a slice of understanding as to why Jews needed a homeland. It’s hardly a path to reconciliation, but it isn’t anti-Semitism either."

https://www.jpost.com/american-politics/what-did-rashida-tlaib-really-say-about-the-holocaust-589711

Her actual quote:
"Absolutely. Let me tell you — I mean, for me, I think two weeks ago we celebrated, or took a moment I think in our country to remember, the Holocaust. And there’s a kind of a calming feeling, I always tell folks, when I think of the Holocaust and the tragedy of the Holocaust in the fact that it was my ancestors — Palestinians — who lost their land and some lost their lives, their livelihood, their human dignity, their existence in many ways had been wiped out, and some people’s passports — I mean, just all of it was in the name of trying to create a safe haven for Jews, post-the Holocaust, post-the tragedy and the horrific persecution of Jews across the world at that time. And I love the fact that it was my ancestors that provided that, right?, in many ways. But they did it in a way that took their human dignity away, right, and it was forced on them."

Definitely feels like you're deliberately misunderstanding her to try and prove your brand of partisan rhetoric isn't as bad.

There were good people on both sides of the Holocaust.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 05, 2021, 06:56:16 PM
There were good people on both sides of the Holocaust.
-Steve King
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 05, 2021, 07:16:49 PM
Bad Nevada. Bad!

https://apnews.com/article/legislature-legislation-local-governments-nevada-economy-2fa79128a7bf41073c1e9102e8a0e5f0

Hopefully state legislature kills it and we get some reactions from idiots crying about how bibbity-thousand jerbs were stolen from them a la Amazon NYC.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on February 05, 2021, 08:25:57 PM
Bad Nevada. Bad!

https://apnews.com/article/legislature-legislation-local-governments-nevada-economy-2fa79128a7bf41073c1e9102e8a0e5f0

Hopefully state legislature kills it and we get some reactions from idiots crying about how bibbity-thousand jerbs were stolen from them a la Amazon NYC.

Is there precedent for this?  The first thing that comes to mind is "Coal Mine Towns" but I didn't think the town was literally run by the company. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on February 05, 2021, 09:03:01 PM
Definitely feels like you're affording someone a level of nuance you otherwise wouldn't given the initial next to their name, but that's pretty much what you do. 

There are other very strong reasons I am interested in whether things are actually anti-semitic, and you assuming otherwise is kind of fucked up.

There were good people on both sides of the Holocaust.

Cool.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 06, 2021, 09:08:34 AM
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1357785974005256193?s=19

Manchin trying his hardest to sabotage midterm elections
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 06, 2021, 09:56:48 AM
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1357785974005256193?s=19

Manchin trying his hardest to sabotage midterm elections
It's a tough one considering the wide variation of cost of living/salaries in the US.  You have to error on the side of giving some people a check that don't need it to avoid skipping people who happen to live in high cost of living areas and make a larger salary that doesn't go as far.

I think a reasonable compromise would be to lower the phaseout beginning point from 75K to maybe 65k or so,  but don't change where the phaseout ends.  Effectively doesn't change the number of people who get checks, but at least lowers the amount people with higher incomes get. 

There are still holes in it.  If it's based on 2019 income taxes, what about people who lost jobs since then and have little income. Someone who made 100K in a big city would get little if anything even though they made nothing this year because they got laid off.

Hopefully they allow these people to use their 2020 income taxes to base it on, even though they may have to wait a little longer until they file.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 06, 2021, 02:46:44 PM
Quote from: mj2sexay
That's what I like about you though del, always willing to politely call me out on my excrement without resorting to ad hominem and viciousness.
Imho, disagreeing with someone doesn't make them evil or worthy of going off the deep end, especially when it comes to politics.  No reason why some self-absorbed politician or anyone's political philosophy should hold that much emotional sway over me when I have enough 'issues upstairs' as it is.


Quote from: mj2sexay
And this place is way way WAYYY too hung up on the shriveled up raisins of a pathetic, geriatric drunk.
You motherless, cock-sucking son of a bitch, who the fuck do you think you're kidding you fuck?!!  A 'raisin' is a dried-up grape.  Pelosi's octogenarian orbs are anything but.  They're luscious and succulent and you belong in a monastery. 

 
Quote from: bojanglesman
Assassination of Pelosi boobs is punishable by lethal injection.
Spot on bo.   Boob(s)...double lethal injection.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 06, 2021, 05:03:23 PM
Imho, disagreeing with someone doesn't make them evil or worthy of going off the deep end, especially when it comes to politics.  No reason why some self-absorbed politician or anyone's political philosophy should hold that much emotional sway over me when I have enough 'issues upstairs' as it is.

You motherless, cock-sucking son of a bitch, who the fuck do you think you're kidding you fuck?!!  A 'raisin' is a dried-up grape.  Pelosi's octogenarian orbs are anything but.  They're luscious and succulent and you belong in a monastery. 

 Spot on bo.   Boob(s)...double lethal injection.
Haha.  This guy....
I think we are pretty much in agreement that if you don't worship the wrinkly watermelons of Pelosi, you should be shot in the street.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 07, 2021, 11:40:42 AM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210207/4e0a250cc8713fdb4ab2f99814b9c56c.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 08, 2021, 11:53:15 AM
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-wright/texas-republican-first-in-u-s-congress-to-die-from-covid-19-idINKBN2A81WE

I don't know what a "constitutional conservative" is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 08, 2021, 01:15:12 PM
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/02/08/fetterman-senate-pennsylvania-466932

The depressing things is that you just know they're going to back some party loyalist against him in the primary. They'd honestly rather have a Republican they can publicly disagree with in the seat, than a progressive they can't.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 08, 2021, 01:28:48 PM
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-health-coronavirus-usa-wright/texas-republican-first-in-u-s-congress-to-die-from-covid-19-idINKBN2A81WE

I don't know what a "constitutional conservative" is.
It's when you declare any attempt to use government to improve lives to be unconstitutional.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 08, 2021, 04:59:33 PM
It's when you declare any attempt to use government to improve lives to be unconstitutional.

Guns improve lives, pinko.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 08, 2021, 05:16:50 PM
Guns improve lives, pinko.
If every homeless person was provided a shotgun and a box of shells I think we could turn things around pretty quickly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on February 08, 2021, 09:10:30 PM
If every homeless person was provided a shotgun and a box of shells I think we could turn things around pretty quickly.

Well, now with no seats in the subway to sleep on, they don't have anything else to do.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 08, 2021, 10:34:44 PM
https://twitter.com/iD4RO/status/1358949299804119041?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 11, 2021, 01:28:59 PM
As much as I like Fetterman, he’s going to have to come up with a better answer for this.

https://verysmartbrothas.theroot.com/john-fetterman-has-had-eight-years-to-apologize-for-pul-1846249115 (https://verysmartbrothas.theroot.com/john-fetterman-has-had-eight-years-to-apologize-for-pul-1846249115)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 11, 2021, 02:43:24 PM
As much as I like Fetterman, he’s going to have to come up with a better answer for this.

https://verysmartbrothas.theroot.com/john-fetterman-has-had-eight-years-to-apologize-for-pul-1846249115 (https://verysmartbrothas.theroot.com/john-fetterman-has-had-eight-years-to-apologize-for-pul-1846249115)
Can't wait for this to be the bad faith reason why PA should vote for [generic fundraising puppet] instead.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 11, 2021, 03:11:08 PM
Can't wait for this to be the bad faith reason why PA should vote for [generic fundraising puppet] instead.

If it comes to that it’ll be because Fetterman failed to answer this properly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 11, 2021, 03:12:59 PM
If it comes to that it’ll be because Fetterman failed to answer this properly.
Who I'm prepared to blame depends on how much worse the alternative is in the primary.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 11, 2021, 03:35:04 PM
Who I'm prepared to blame depends on how much worse the alternative is in the primary.

It'll only be his fault. All he will have to do is give a better answer to the black voters of PA than hd has for the last 8 years and the Republicans and any Dem contenders lose the ability to hold it over him.

Until then, they're just going to keep painting it as a close call version of Ahmaud Arbery.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 12, 2021, 06:45:37 AM
Some MSNBC contributors continue to be on par with Fox News levels of derangement.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210212/4e344a40a562099446a9d7fd3514ff87.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 12, 2021, 07:30:47 AM
It'll only be his fault. All he will have to do is give a better answer to the black voters of PA than hd has for the last 8 years and the Republicans and any Dem contenders lose the ability to hold it over him.

Until then, they're just going to keep painting it as a close call version of Ahmaud Arbery.
https://john-fetterman.medium.com/braddock-55c82a9a7bcf
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 12, 2021, 07:47:02 AM
https://john-fetterman.medium.com/braddock-55c82a9a7bcf

That’s...probably the best he could say at this point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 12, 2021, 09:22:20 AM

  Fetterman's selfless record speaks for itself.  Guy's no Zimmerman.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 12, 2021, 11:58:28 AM
UAE mad

https://theintercept.com/2021/02/12/ro-khanna-yemen-uae-ambassador/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 12, 2021, 12:12:47 PM
UAE mad

https://theintercept.com/2021/02/12/ro-khanna-yemen-uae-ambassador/

That reads as if it happened quite a while ago.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 12, 2021, 12:14:05 PM
That reads as if it happened quite a while ago.
They're probably still mad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 12, 2021, 04:47:48 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9246917/amp/Marjorie-Taylor-Green-openly-cheated-husband-men-gym.html?__twitter_impression=true

Read this on the shitter at 2am and could not stop laughing my derriere off

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 16, 2021, 09:52:40 AM
Wonder how he feels about this one now.

https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1296134869320380419?s=21 (https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1296134869320380419?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 16, 2021, 10:24:06 AM
Obviously the blackouts were caused by too many Commiefornians moving to Texas.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 16, 2021, 11:09:02 AM
I love how we're pretending that Cruz made that comment anywhere near the same context as the blackouts in California.

Rolling blackouts due to rationing versus a rare occurrence of mother nature. Totally the same!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 16, 2021, 11:30:26 AM
The callousness is wrong in any context, especially in a profession where perception is the largest key factor.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 16, 2021, 11:34:12 AM
I love how we're pretending that Cruz made that comment anywhere near the same context as the blackouts in California.

Rolling blackouts due to rationing versus a rare occurrence of mother nature. Totally the same!
As if this situation wasn't made worse by policy decisions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on February 16, 2021, 03:00:18 PM
I love how we're pretending that Cruz made that comment anywhere near the same context as the blackouts in California.

Rolling blackouts due to rationing versus a rare occurrence of mother nature. Totally the same!

Quote
The immediate cause of the power shortages was the heat storm, which saw California experience four of its five hottest August days in the last 35 years, the analysis found.
...
State officials say they’ve been working to get more of those clean resources built but were caught off guard by the intensity and region-wide nature of the August heat wave. California nearly experienced more rolling blackouts over Labor Day weekend.

https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2020-10-06/california-rolling-blackouts-climate-change-poor-planning#:~:text=California%20suffered%20its%20first%20rolling,Tuesday%20by%20three%20state%20agencies.

Intense weather conditions stressing inadequate energy infrastructure causing widespread loss of power - at least somewhere near the same context.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 16, 2021, 03:55:01 PM
ERCOT has a monopoly on Texas energy, never winterized their infrastructure, and were not forced to via legislation and were then hit by a freak weather condition. Result: millions of Texans without power and the oldest and poorest are left to suffer the most.

PG&E has a near monopoly on California energy, never properly protected their infrastructure, were not forced to via legislation and were hit by a freak weather condition. Result: Millions of Californians without power and the oldest and poorest were left to suffer the most.

Point being: taunting states for massive disasters is a bad look at best.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 16, 2021, 06:49:40 PM
This guy was a mayor

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210217/5e5dfcae8ff1c7cf978dd75a867d69d5.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 16, 2021, 07:09:55 PM
This reads like Scrooge in A Christmas Carrol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 16, 2021, 07:10:08 PM
This guy was a mayor

And now he's upset because his wife got fired as a result of what he said.

https://ktxs.com/news/local/colorado-city-mayor-resigns-after-controversial-facebook-post

It's just cancel culture gone mad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 16, 2021, 07:12:33 PM
And now he's upset because his wife got fired as a result of what he said.

https://ktxs.com/news/local/colorado-city-mayor-resigns-after-controversial-facebook-post

It's just cancel culture gone mad.

Now do the one where he becomes part of the solution.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 16, 2021, 07:16:21 PM
Now do the one where he becomes part of the solution.

I think that someone with views like that not holding any kind of public office is a good starting point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 16, 2021, 08:41:53 PM
Btw I choose to interpret "think outside of the box to survive" as "loot the excrement out of Dollar General".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 16, 2021, 08:54:59 PM
New Garrison just dropped

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210217/621a9f3d3e394d7dd1b1d363ee78c9e3.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 16, 2021, 11:27:08 PM
But has he received the cum yet?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 17, 2021, 10:46:46 AM
Today’s Ron DeSantis is a POS moment:

https://twitter.com/meidastouch/status/1362065160328802304?s=21 (https://twitter.com/meidastouch/status/1362065160328802304?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 17, 2021, 01:22:40 PM
GOP strategy to win back GA: make sure less people vote

https://twitter.com/markniesse/status/1362016823349309440?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 17, 2021, 01:38:17 PM
GOP strategy to win back GA: make sure less people vote

https://twitter.com/markniesse/status/1362016823349309440?s=19

Voter suppression was always their game.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 18, 2021, 06:10:02 AM
https://twitter.com/genefortexas/status/1362265046387220480?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on February 18, 2021, 07:10:35 AM
This guy was a mayor

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210217/5e5dfcae8ff1c7cf978dd75a867d69d5.jpg)
This sounds like a nice place to live
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 18, 2021, 07:45:55 AM
https://twitter.com/genefortexas/status/1362265046387220480?s=21

Oh man, what a piece of excrement.

Edit: A contrast:

https://twitter.com/davenewworld_2/status/1362358239325810690?s=19 (https://twitter.com/davenewworld_2/status/1362358239325810690?s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 18, 2021, 09:32:16 AM
https://twitter.com/genefortexas/status/1362265046387220480?s=21

sounds like our current provincial premier.  The guy ran our province from Costa Rica until the pandemic hit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 18, 2021, 09:43:18 AM
sounds like our current provincial premier.  The guy ran our province from Costa Rica until the pandemic hit.

We have judges presiding over court cases from their vacation homes in the Caribbean.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-judge-court-cases-caribbean-1.5915679
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 18, 2021, 09:46:47 AM
We have judges presiding over court cases from their vacation homes in the Caribbean.

https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toronto/ontario-judge-court-cases-caribbean-1.5915679

we're clearly in the wrong business.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 18, 2021, 10:58:40 AM
Cruz requested assistance from the Houston PD to get to the airport for his vacation.

https://twitter.com/macfarlanenews/status/1362444728571219972?s=21 (https://twitter.com/macfarlanenews/status/1362444728571219972?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 18, 2021, 11:00:13 AM
Cruz requested assistance from the Houston PD to get to the airport for his vacation.

https://twitter.com/macfarlanenews/status/1362444728571219972?s=21 (https://twitter.com/macfarlanenews/status/1362444728571219972?s=21)

Man, no one reads a room anymore.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on February 18, 2021, 11:00:17 AM
Cruz requested assistance from the Houston PD to get to the airport for his vacation.

https://twitter.com/macfarlanenews/status/1362444728571219972?s=21 (https://twitter.com/macfarlanenews/status/1362444728571219972?s=21)

lmao of course he did
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on February 18, 2021, 11:01:34 AM
In Houston last night, power came back on for a pretty significant portion of those "inside the loop" so the city center.  People started scrambling for food/supplies and then the power cut again within 30 minutes...so you have hundreds of cars on the road in a highly congested area with no working traffic signals or street lights. 

Crazy as hell. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 18, 2021, 11:05:27 AM
I mean, it's not like Ted Cruz could/would do much to help as a senator besides take calls even if he stayed home, but it sure does look awful heading to sun and fun while your constituents are suffering.

The karma gods will give him covid while in Cancun.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 18, 2021, 11:12:13 AM
I mean, it's not like Ted Cruz could/would do much to help as a senator besides take calls even if he stayed home, but it sure does look awful heading to sun and fun while your constituents are suffering.

The karma gods will give him covid while in Cancun.
Right, he doesn't have any actual executive responsibility but conspicuously leaving is a bad look.

Like how Andrew Yang fled the city with his family during COVID and wants to be mayor now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 18, 2021, 11:17:59 AM
Update: he's on his way back anc he just missed the upgrade list.

https://twitter.com/carlquintanilla/status/1362420150436319235?s=20 (https://twitter.com/carlquintanilla/status/1362420150436319235?s=20)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on February 18, 2021, 11:21:54 AM
Like how Andrew Yang fled the city with his family during COVID and wants to be mayor now.

LIVING IN A TWO BEDROOM APARTMENT WITH KIDS IS JUST TOO HARD!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 18, 2021, 12:02:51 PM
Update: he's on his way back anc he just missed the upgrade list.

https://twitter.com/carlquintanilla/status/1362420150436319235?s=20 (https://twitter.com/carlquintanilla/status/1362420150436319235?s=20)

TIL that his first name is Rafael.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 18, 2021, 01:32:47 PM
TIL that his first name is Rafael.
The anti-Beto
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 18, 2021, 03:28:57 PM
Apparently professional fat lying sack of excrement Sarah Huckabee Sanders is the favourite to become the next Governor of Arkansas.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 18, 2021, 03:31:01 PM
Apparently professional fat lying sack of excrement Sarah Huckabee Sanders is the favourite to become the next Governor of Arkansas.

Arkansas is a different world than the U.S.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on February 18, 2021, 03:43:29 PM
Arkansas is a different world than the U.S.

Quite possibly the worst place I've ever been
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 18, 2021, 04:22:47 PM
Quite possibly the worst place I've ever been

Worse than West Virginia?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 18, 2021, 04:23:48 PM
Power restored to 2 million homes in Texas. Water is still a major concern for most of them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 18, 2021, 04:39:50 PM
Worse than West Virginia?

At least West Virginia has badass whitewater rafting.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 18, 2021, 05:03:06 PM
Ted Cruz blames daughters for Cancun trip.

https://twitter.com/VaughnHillyard/status/1362464519042326528?s=19 (https://twitter.com/VaughnHillyard/status/1362464519042326528?s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 18, 2021, 05:10:57 PM
Ted Cruz blames daughters for Cancun trip.

https://twitter.com/VaughnHillyard/status/1362464519042326528?s=19 (https://twitter.com/VaughnHillyard/status/1362464519042326528?s=19)

Quote
The Claim: Ted Cruz said he made a spontaneous trip to Cancun to drop his daughters off and return today.

The Facts: Multiple news orgs confirm Ted Cruz was originally scheduled to return on Saturday and booked today's return flight this morning at 6 am - after he got caught.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 18, 2021, 05:30:11 PM

https://twitter.com/LarinzoMosley/status/1362080954651656192

Larinzo
@LarinzoMosley
Idolizing a politician is like believing the stripper really likes you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 18, 2021, 05:49:18 PM
Arkansas is a different world than the U.S.

Quite possibly the worst place I've ever been

Imagine being more badly run than somewhere like Arkansas.

(https://i.imgur.com/5mLe74P.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 18, 2021, 05:51:10 PM
Lol.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 18, 2021, 07:01:36 PM
https://twitter.com/EoinHiggins_/status/1362566874387648518?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 18, 2021, 08:03:13 PM
6 Capitol Police officers suspended, 29 others placed under investigation for roles in the Capitol Insurrection.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/18/politics/capitol-police-officers-suspended/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/18/politics/capitol-police-officers-suspended/index.html)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 18, 2021, 11:14:21 PM
They found a "progressive" opponent for Fetterman, looking forward to 2 years of bad faith support of a guy who endorsed Joe Biden for president the day after he announced he was running.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 18, 2021, 11:22:14 PM
6 Capitol Police officers suspended, 29 others placed under investigation for roles in the Capitol Insurrection.

https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/18/politics/capitol-police-officers-suspended/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2021/02/18/politics/capitol-police-officers-suspended/index.html)

Don't worry, their union will make sure nothing happens to them and they all get their guaranteed pay raises this year
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 19, 2021, 09:14:27 PM
I found it. I found the point at which mj abandons him.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/ted-cruz-poodle-cancun-texas-b1804640.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 19, 2021, 09:16:19 PM
I found it. I found the point at which mj abandons him.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/ted-cruz-poodle-cancun-texas-b1804640.html
Poodles are libs so it was ok actually.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 23, 2021, 11:49:29 AM
David Perdue will not run against Rev Warnock in 2022. I would have enjoyed watching him lose to both Democrats.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on February 23, 2021, 08:14:23 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/Eu9EYpMWYAAMHnK.jpg)

(https://i.kinja-img.com/gawker-media/image/upload/c_fill,f_auto,fl_progressive,g_center,h_675,pg_1,q_80,w_1200/idyd5pdopuzfmd5rvdpp.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 23, 2021, 08:17:38 PM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210224/8c5bc70bff7d1100a4286d19d3cd10cb.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 23, 2021, 09:00:02 PM
Who though? What views?

"Yeah, I think Trump probably didn't win the last election..."

BURN THE HERETIC
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 23, 2021, 09:06:06 PM


Who though? What views?

"Oh, you know the ones"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 23, 2021, 09:27:15 PM

"Oh, you know the ones"

It would be a pretty quiet CPAC if they were a barrier to entry. Could probably save a bunch of money by just booking a booth at the local Applebees and holding it there.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 23, 2021, 09:46:37 PM
It would be a pretty quiet CPAC if they were a barrier to entry. Could probably save a bunch of money by just booking a booth at the local Applebees and holding it there.
They could just read ads designed to prey on people with early stage dementia and the rhetoric would be indistinguishable.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210224/3d0ab9e3aaa9f6f01aad8c922232fd99.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 24, 2021, 10:39:10 AM
And of course if CPAC actually allowed said speaker to continue, it'd be further proof as to how the GOP has been taken over by one junior congresswoman from Georgia.

Boomer/Colbert tier type nitpicking thats fit for those who continually made the case that Andrew Cuomo was doing a better job managing the pandemic as opposed to Ronny D.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 24, 2021, 10:45:25 AM
And of course if CPAC actually allowed said speaker to continue, it'd be further proof as to how the GOP has been taken over by one junior congresswoman from Georgia.

Boomer/Colbert tier type nitpicking thats fit for those who continually made the case that Andrew Cuomo was doing a better job managing the pandemic as opposed to Ronny D.
This is exactly like 1941.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 24, 2021, 11:20:05 AM
And of course if CPAC actually allowed said speaker to continue, it'd be further proof as to how the GOP has been taken over by one junior congresswoman from Georgia.

Is that who they were referring to? I genuinely didn't/don't know who it is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 24, 2021, 11:20:14 AM
https://twitter.com/lindseyboylan/status/1364593495957262350?s=21

RIP Cuomo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 24, 2021, 11:33:55 AM
https://twitter.com/lindseyboylan/status/1364593495957262350?s=21

RIP Cuomo

Not the least bit shocking in light of the other accusations. Good riddance. May we never hear about him running for president again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on February 24, 2021, 11:38:49 AM
They gotta get rid of his brother, too.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 24, 2021, 11:44:37 AM
Also, Ron Desantis is a piece of excrement,
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 24, 2021, 02:14:53 PM
Rep Cornyn with just the worst amount irony:

https://twitter.com/jdawsey1/status/1364348519264452610?s=19 (https://twitter.com/jdawsey1/status/1364348519264452610?s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 24, 2021, 03:07:06 PM
Is that who they were referring to? I genuinely didn't/don't know who it is.

The speaker being referenced and disinvited (Young Pharoah) has said such things as, "there's no validity to judaism."

That's a little different then dumb holocaust comparisons which have become all too plentiful.


Also, Ron Desantis is a piece of excrement,

Hopefully that's President Desantis in 4 years.

Rep Cornyn with just the worst amount irony:

https://twitter.com/jdawsey1/status/1364348519264452610?s=19 (https://twitter.com/jdawsey1/status/1364348519264452610?s=19)

Neera Tanden is a stupid queynte.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 24, 2021, 03:39:45 PM
Rep Gerry Connelly calling out Jim Jordan for being a bitch.

https://twitter.com/Sky_Lee_1/status/1364646431752134659?s=09 (https://twitter.com/Sky_Lee_1/status/1364646431752134659?s=09)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 24, 2021, 03:56:36 PM
Boomer/Colbert tier type nitpicking that's fit

 for those who continually made the case that Andrew Cuomo was doing a better job managing the pandemic as opposed to Ronny D.
  All you need to know about Cuomo and 'pandemic mgmt' is one Larry Schwartz, a snake's snake.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 25, 2021, 08:11:01 AM
DeSantis didn't do anything special to handle the pandemic besides be governor of a non-epicenter state.

And suppress virus data.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 25, 2021, 01:28:16 PM
Blue MAGA

https://twitter.com/ashleyfeinberg/status/1364767638212214802?s=19

https://twitter.com/BlakeleyBartley/status/1364794280804552705?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 25, 2021, 01:51:19 PM
Blue MAGA

https://twitter.com/ashleyfeinberg/status/1364767638212214802?s=19

https://twitter.com/BlakeleyBartley/status/1364794280804552705?s=19

Obviously a right wing false flag operative.

Also, people arguing on Twitter about whether the kind of person who uses Twitter heavily is the sort of person you want in a position of responsibility is... well, it's something.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 25, 2021, 02:10:07 PM


Also, people arguing on Twitter about whether the kind of person who uses Twitter heavily is the sort of person you want in a position of responsibility is... well, it's something.

Sure, but that's not why leftists oppose Tanden.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 25, 2021, 02:18:22 PM

Sure, but that's not why leftists oppose Tanden.

I know, I'm in agreement that she seems to be problematic. It's pretty hard to hold the right accountable for their shittiness if you're going to copy it. It's just funny that Twitter users are whining about the appointment of people who use Twitter. It's almost like they subconsciously recognise that people who use Twitter are cunts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 27, 2021, 05:42:18 AM
https://twitter.com/lauren_peller/status/1365416674011344907?s=19

But proxy voting is unknostatooshunal
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 27, 2021, 10:13:38 AM
https://twitter.com/lauren_peller/status/1365416674011344907?s=19

But proxy voting is unknostatooshunal

Lolcrenshaw
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 28, 2021, 08:11:06 AM
For dcm

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210228/322f4f9426bd6027978691b2fbc7ac31.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 28, 2021, 09:41:41 AM
https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1366015574191538177?s=21

RIP Cuomo x2
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 28, 2021, 09:43:53 AM
https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1366042045861793794?s=21

Lmaooooo

(https://i.ibb.co/bL2zb47/526-F8-FBF-AD40-4609-8-A02-3-EE99-AF8-DBA7.png) (https://ibb.co/Bjrqnhw)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 28, 2021, 10:07:45 AM
https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1366015574191538177?s=21

RIP Cuomo x2
He's a cockroach, people will forget and he will hang around.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 28, 2021, 10:32:29 AM
I wish people would protect women like they would the reputation of man they have never met and will likely never give a excrement about them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 28, 2021, 11:20:11 AM
https://twitter.com/aoc/status/1366042045861793794?s=21

Lmaooooo

(https://i.ibb.co/bL2zb47/526-F8-FBF-AD40-4609-8-A02-3-EE99-AF8-DBA7.png) (https://ibb.co/Bjrqnhw)
Words cannot describe how much I hate these people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 28, 2021, 06:21:40 PM
Maybe a Moreland Commission-type group should investigate.  Um, check that..
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 28, 2021, 06:32:15 PM
So apparently the CPAC stage is designed in the same pattern as the Odal Rune and I can't decide whether this is the internet overreacting or if it's just another step along the path.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 01, 2021, 06:45:04 AM
Weird how so many people seemed to forget Andrew Cuomo was a complete poopchute over the past year and are now suddenly like "Whoa, WTF? What happened to this guy?"

It's like watching Rudy Giuliani again. 9/11 made everyone forget he was a complete piece of excrement till his hair was dripping onto his face while defending the worst president in history.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 01, 2021, 08:28:45 AM
Weird how so many people seemed to forget Andrew Cuomo was a complete poopchute over the past year and are now suddenly like "Whoa, WTF? What happened to this guy?"

It's like watching Rudy Giuliani again. 9/11 made everyone forget he was a complete piece of excrement till his hair was dripping onto his face while defending the worst president in history.
I've been anti-Cuomo since 2014 and the Moreland Commission debacle. Watching the complete apathy toward it in the following gubernatorial primary was pretty formative for me in retrospect.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 01, 2021, 08:59:15 AM
Weird how so many people seemed to forget Andrew Cuomo was a complete poopchute over the past year and are now suddenly like "Whoa, WTF? What happened to this guy?"

It's like watching Rudy Giuliani again. 9/11 made everyone forget he was a complete piece of excrement till his hair was dripping onto his face while defending the worst president in history.

Robert De Niro, Spike Lee, Ben Stiller, Billy Joel, Rosie Perez and Billy Crystal would beg to differ along with the thousands of others who launched his book onto the NYT best seller's list in addition to the numerous media outlets who assisted him in promoting his (self-promoting) "American Crisis: LEADERSHIP LESSONS" book.

@ the 5:45 mark:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qAL7z4cvPuU&feature=emb_title

Andrew Cuomo's the man!  8)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 01, 2021, 11:39:30 AM
Another high quality individual the Republican Party appear to have selected here:

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/madison-crowther-lies-wheelchair_n_603c5e83c5b6d7794ae01026?ri18n=true
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 01, 2021, 11:43:07 AM
Another high quality individual the Republican Party appear to have selected here:

https://www.huffingtonpost.ca/entry/madison-crowther-lies-wheelchair_n_603c5e83c5b6d7794ae01026?ri18n=true
That's what the libs want you to believe. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 01, 2021, 11:58:25 AM
That's what the libs want you to believe. 

I'm sure it's just some terrible smear campaign.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 01, 2021, 12:09:27 PM
I'm sure it's just some terrible smear campaign.
He's in a wheelchair!  He can't be an poopchute!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 01, 2021, 12:16:37 PM
Lol, tell Kamala to tell the one about "fweedom" again.

But yes, this is totally a Republican trait, politicians embellishing or flat out fabricating circumstances, accomplishments, service or anecdotes from their past. How many VC's did Blumenthal kill with his bare hands?

And that's assume solely for the sake of passing petty quip that I take whatever comes out of HuffPo or what they're using as the underlying source material for this at face value (and considering its WaPo, you can guess whether I do or don't).

I know next to nothing about this guy because he's not in my state nevermind my district, but its interesting to see the attention he's garnering as a 25 year old junior congressman.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 01, 2021, 12:55:13 PM
Lol, tell Kamala to tell the one about "fweedom" again.

But yes, this is totally a Republican trait, politicians embellishing or flat out fabricating circumstances, accomplishments, service or anecdotes from their past. How many VC's did Blumenthal kill with his bare hands?

And that's assume solely for the sake of passing petty quip that I take whatever comes out of HuffPo or what they're using as the underlying source material for this at face value (and considering its WaPo, you can guess whether I do or don't).

I know next to nothing about this guy because he's not in my state nevermind my district, but its interesting to see the attention he's garnering as a 25 year old junior congressman.
Yes very interesting how an obvious bullshitter keeps getting called out on it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 01, 2021, 03:12:12 PM
Lol, tell Kamala to tell the one about "fweedom" again.

But yes, this is totally a Republican trait, politicians embellishing or flat out fabricating circumstances, accomplishments, service or anecdotes from their past. How many VC's did Blumenthal kill with his bare hands?

And that's assume solely for the sake of passing petty quip that I take whatever comes out of HuffPo or what they're using as the underlying source material for this at face value (and considering its WaPo, you can guess whether I do or don't).

I know next to nothing about this guy because he's not in my state nevermind my district, but its interesting to see the attention he's garnering as a 25 year old junior congressman.

Project and deflect mj but if true Crowther's a piece of excrement to throw a "friend" 'under the car' for personal advancement--and off a lie no less. 

Stretching the truth's for your own benefit is one thing; fvcking a friend over?...and getting rewarded for it???

crawling from the wreckage, crawling from the wreckage,
bits of me are spattered on the trees and in the hedges,
crawling from the wreckage, crawling from the wreckage,
into a brand new car...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AY2yfoWTYRE
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 01, 2021, 04:20:52 PM
Project and deflect mj but if true Crowther's a piece of excrement to throw a "friend" 'under the car' for personal advancement--and off a lie no less. 

Stretching the truth's for your own benefit is one thing; fvcking a friend over?...and getting rewarded for it???

crawling from the wreckage, crawling from the wreckage,
bits of me are spattered on the trees and in the hedges,
crawling from the wreckage, crawling from the wreckage,
into a brand new car...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AY2yfoWTYRE

It's not projection or deflection when this is broached from a partisan viewpoint from jump.

And again, we'll all have to consider the source.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 01, 2021, 05:00:08 PM
lmao

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1366520898870738952?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 01, 2021, 06:01:19 PM
Someone should call a House hearing on OSU wrestling team sexual abuse.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 02, 2021, 09:12:30 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/VEmIiwu.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 02, 2021, 12:52:47 PM
Fun seeing those "country over party" people for the last four years draw their collective ire towards Manchin and her sexiness Mama Synema for the high crime of not wanting to repeal basic procedural norms that ensure effective representation in a time of deep partisanship.

No hypocrisy at play.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 02, 2021, 01:32:04 PM


Fun seeing those "country over party" people for the last four years draw their collective ire towards Manchin and her sexiness Mama Synema for the high crime of not wanting to repeal basic procedural norms that ensure effective representation in a time of deep partisanship.

No hypocrisy at play.

A. You obviously don't gaf about norms and B. If the norms don't serve the country...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 02, 2021, 01:45:11 PM
Meanwhile,

https://twitter.com/AndrewSolender/status/1366827731326033920?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 02, 2021, 03:27:45 PM
Republican lawyer admits they cannot win elections without voter suppression.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210302/cb85b3a1e7ff3c3f0407b92a51dc5e43.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on March 02, 2021, 03:52:57 PM
Meanwhile,

https://twitter.com/AndrewSolender/status/1366827731326033920?s=19

But my feeeeet huuuuurt
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 02, 2021, 04:33:32 PM
Fun seeing those "country over party" people for the last four years draw their collective ire towards Manchin and her sexiness

Mama Synema

for the high crime of not wanting to repeal basic procedural norms that ensure effective representation in a time of deep partisanship.

No hypocrisy at play.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d6/Kyrsten_Sinema_%2843727430340%29.jpg/320px-Kyrsten_Sinema_%2843727430340%29.jpg)
 
  Weird but would
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 02, 2021, 05:31:54 PM

A. You obviously don't gaf about norms and B. If the norms don't serve the country...

Except the norms do serve the country.

As far as not giving a freak about norms, please show any message from the celebration that was 2016 in which I demanded the majority in Congress and the executive branch start completely doing away with procedure in order to fight the obstruction we all knew was coming.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d6/Kyrsten_Sinema_%2843727430340%29.jpg/320px-Kyrsten_Sinema_%2843727430340%29.jpg)
 
  Weird but would

Would smash for the four minutes and thirty seven seconds it would require before she decided to go full lesbian.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 02, 2021, 06:31:12 PM
White House pulled Tanden nomination
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 02, 2021, 06:34:27 PM
White House pulled Tanden nomination
lmao wrecked
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 02, 2021, 06:35:16 PM
A friend of a friend works in the department and is now very excited about the idea of the current deputy being nominated for the head role.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 02, 2021, 08:52:34 PM
The Karens are furious

https://twitter.com/princessmom122/status/1366923429522403328?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 03, 2021, 05:56:16 AM
Someone TLDR Neera Tanden for me
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 03, 2021, 06:53:57 AM
Someone TLDR Neera Tanden for me
She's a Clinton satellite and to this point has existed solely to fundraise from any source possible.

She expected to get a cabinet position under Hillary and when that didn't pan out she spent 4 years shitting on Bernie and Republicans on Twitter instead.

And now her 2nd chance got rejected and it's funny.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 03, 2021, 07:35:19 AM
Embarrassing that they're still keeping up this charade

https://twitter.com/SecBlinken/status/1366917587578331144?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 03, 2021, 07:43:13 AM
TIL mj2sexay and delevan would pork Chelsea Handler
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 03, 2021, 08:58:42 AM
TIL mj2sexay and delevan would pork Chelsea Handler

They'd have to fight their way past me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 03, 2021, 09:22:38 AM
Someone TLDR Neera Tanden for me

Picture someone so unlikeable that its pretty much a bi-partisan take that she's a malignant queynte.

https://twitter.com/JoyceWhiteVance/status/1366938862778527752

Lol, 25 years as a federal prosecutor to sound like a freaking moron.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 03, 2021, 09:28:23 AM
TIL mj2sexay and delevan would pork Chelsea Handler

  Nope, she's all JE's.  Stickin with the weird-but-would public orifice.

 
Embarrassing that they're still keeping up this charade

https://twitter.com/SecBlinken/status/1366917587578331144?s=19

  Good: local boy (Yonkers)
  Bad:   Libya for starters


Picture someone so unlikeable that its pretty much a bi-partisan take that she's a malignant queynte.

https://twitter.com/JoyceWhiteVance/status/1366938862778527752

Lol, 25 years as a federal prosecutor to sound like a freaking moron.

  Personality as birth control.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 03, 2021, 09:30:16 AM
https://twitter.com/neekolul/status/1366877271110352898?s=21

and we back
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 03, 2021, 09:46:55 AM
Picture someone so unlikeable that its pretty much a bi-partisan take that she's a malignant queynte.

https://twitter.com/JoyceWhiteVance/status/1366938862778527752

Lol, 25 years as a federal prosecutor to sound like a freaking moron.
My favorite moment where Neera spoke truth to power was when she said the US should take Libya's oil to pay for stuff.

Or when Sanders had a heart attack and she complained all day about MSNBC not talking about it enough.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 03, 2021, 08:49:26 PM
I thought Mike Pompeo got fired?

https://twitter.com/SecBlinken/status/1367287375701938180?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 03, 2021, 08:54:24 PM
Yea Blinken sucks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 03, 2021, 09:07:15 PM
The obsession American politicians have with Israel is bewildering.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 04, 2021, 07:08:58 AM
The obsession American politicians have with Israel is bewildering.
“If there were not an Israel, we would have to invent one to make sure our interests were preserved,” - Joe Biden, 9/30/13
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 04, 2021, 07:53:24 AM
John Thune opposing a minimum wage increase because he made $6/hour working in restaurants as a "kid".

Adjusted for inflation, that would be $24/hour today.

John Thune is a freaking moron.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 04, 2021, 08:07:13 AM
John Thune opposing a minimum wage increase because he made $6/hour working in restaurants as a "kid".

Adjusted for inflation, that would be $24/hour today.

John Thune is a politician to the death.

FYP.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 04, 2021, 08:21:03 AM
John Thune opposing a minimum wage increase because he made $6/hour working in restaurants as a "kid".

Adjusted for inflation, that would be $24/hour today.

John Thune is a freaking moron.
FYP.
In the game of Stupid or Liar? I'm filing this one under Stupid, I think he actually believes what he's saying.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 04, 2021, 09:05:15 AM
In the game of Stupid or Liar? I'm filing this one under Stupid, I think he actually believes what he's saying.

At this point, I don't see the difference if he believes what he's saying or if he believes what he's saying will have a positive effect on the country.

If he doesn't know how to factor inflation, he's a freaking moron.

If he doesn't think that people he says this to will eventually do the work themselves to factor inflation, he's a freaking moron.

If he thinks that people will be better if companies are allowed to pay them less than a living wage, he's a freaking moron.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 04, 2021, 10:03:37 AM
https://twitter.com/jbouie/status/1364737509650018304





Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 04, 2021, 10:13:33 AM


At this point, I don't see the difference if he believes what he's saying or if he believes what he's saying will have a positive effect on the country.

If he doesn't know how to factor inflation, he's a freaking moron.

If he doesn't think that people he says this to will eventually do the work themselves to factor inflation, he's a freaking moron.

If he thinks that people will be better if companies are allowed to pay them less than a living wage, he's a freaking moron.

You're right, there's no material difference but it's a fun game to play.

When Ted Cruz does it he usually lands on Liar.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 04, 2021, 12:40:31 PM
https://twitter.com/theintercept/status/1367506482800062469?s=19

https://twitter.com/theintercept/status/1367509129967906816?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 04, 2021, 12:53:19 PM
https://twitter.com/theintercept/status/1367506482800062469?s=19

https://twitter.com/theintercept/status/1367509129967906816?s=19
But muh precious norms
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 04, 2021, 02:29:50 PM
If the COVID bill is lowering the check phaseout, why is the total still $1.9 trillion?  I would assume that would trim the total some unless it is going elsewhere in the bill that they haven't announced.  Maybe it only trims off 20-30 billion or so to where it still rounds up to $1.9 trillion.

EDIT: Yeah, that's it.  Too small of a change to round down from 1.9T
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 04, 2021, 03:25:21 PM


If the COVID bill is lowering the check phaseout, why is the total still $1.9 trillion?  I would assume that would trim the total some unless it is going elsewhere in the bill that they haven't announced.  Maybe it only trims off 20-30 billion or so to where it still rounds up to $1.9 trillion.

EDIT: Yeah, that's it.  Too small of a change to round down from 1.9T

This checks out since there was no good reason to tighten eligibility. They've materially hurt some people, pissed off a lot more, and gained nothing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 04, 2021, 04:53:48 PM

This checks out since there was no good reason to tighten eligibility. They've materially hurt some people, pissed off a lot more, and gained nothing.

It was a Duff move- negotiating with themselves.  Moderate dems fault for picking such a dumb hill to defend and Biden's for not calling their bluff.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 04, 2021, 05:40:29 PM
https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1367562330515660801?s=19

Wtf?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 04, 2021, 06:39:08 PM
https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1367562330515660801?s=19

Wtf?

I know the internet isn't the best medium for sarcasm, but I think he's being facetious given the fact that he's trying to jump on the cancel culture bandwagon.

For what its worth, the broader notion of  an unfair cancel culture unquestionably exists but I have no doubt that the merits to the assorted arguments of its existence will be more effectively conveyed by the likes of Melissa Chen, John McWorter and Thomas Chatteron Williams then it would by one Marco Rubio.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 04, 2021, 06:43:50 PM
I know the internet isn't the best medium for sarcasm, but I think he's being facetious given the fact that he's trying to jump on the cancel culture bandwagon.

For what its worth, the broader notion of  an unfair cancel culture unquestionably exists but I have no doubt that the merits to the assorted arguments of its existence will be more effectively conveyed by the likes of Melissa Chen, John McWorter and Thomas Chatteron Williams then it would by one Marco Rubio.
Well I'm an idiot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 04, 2021, 10:08:09 PM


I know the internet isn't the best medium for sarcasm, but I think he's being facetious given the fact that he's trying to jump on the cancel culture bandwagon.

For what its worth, the broader notion of  an unfair cancel culture unquestionably exists but I have no doubt that the merits to the assorted arguments of its existence will be more effectively conveyed by the likes of Melissa Chen, John McWorter and Thomas Chatteron Williams then it would by one Marco Rubio.

Ah yes, Mr. "I kicked a guest out of my French countryside home for speaking ill of Bari Weiss" is certainly going to be able to get people to relate on this issue.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 05, 2021, 09:41:42 AM
I'll hand it to Biden for getting the Republican Party to acknowledge evolution.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 05, 2021, 11:29:50 AM
Make it stop

https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1367838319569215490?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 05, 2021, 11:45:07 AM
Manchin, Sinema, Tester, Shaheen, Hassan, Coons, Carper, King, and every Republican voted against the $15 min wage amendment
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 05, 2021, 11:46:36 AM

Ah yes, Mr. "I kicked a guest out of my French countryside home for speaking ill of Bari Weiss" is certainly going to be able to get people to relate on this issue.

I'm not saying it wasn't somewhat of a fragile move, but removing someone from your own home when they insult a friend is quite different then say the circumstances behind the firing of Donald McNeil at the New York Times.


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 05, 2021, 12:31:27 PM
Manchin, Sinema, Tester, Shaheen, Hassan, Coons, Carper, King, and every Republican voted against the $15 min wage amendment

#cowards #cunts

https://twitter.com/OurDamnTime/status/1367888689649573889 (https://twitter.com/OurDamnTime/status/1367888689649573889)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 05, 2021, 01:12:08 PM
Damn them all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 05, 2021, 02:49:16 PM
https://twitter.com/LizardRumsfeld/status/1367921616143974414?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 05, 2021, 04:31:37 PM
Goddamn...

https://twitter.com/TheNYSocialist/status/1367907295364005898?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on March 05, 2021, 04:33:40 PM
https://twitter.com/LizardRumsfeld/status/1367921616143974414?s=19

I am freaking.  HEARTBROKEN.

https://youtu.be/yBsRvdHJUDk (https://youtu.be/yBsRvdHJUDk)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 05, 2021, 07:50:33 PM
https://twitter.com/LizardRumsfeld/status/1367921616143974414?s=19

Whoever had him in the pool, come collect your winnings.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 06, 2021, 11:33:32 AM
Goddamn...

https://twitter.com/TheNYSocialist/status/1367907295364005898?s=19
Yas kween girlboss!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 06, 2021, 11:37:11 AM
Ted Cruz getting yelled at for wasting everyone's time is always funny

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210306/486b5688518ee1ac03cffbd581b59f35.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 06, 2021, 07:32:43 PM
https://twitter.com/jaredpushner/status/1367946693531025413?s=21

RIP Libs
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 07, 2021, 08:51:41 PM
https://twitter.com/MattBinder/status/1368355113472040960?s=09
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 10, 2021, 08:38:25 AM
Something else for the Senate to butcher

https://twitter.com/eleanor_mueller/status/1369469503780909063?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 10, 2021, 01:25:28 PM
Polling says 75% of Americans, including 59% of Republicans, support the rescue package. Every single GOP member of Congress voted against it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 10, 2021, 08:12:45 PM
Mississippi man touts feature of bill he voted against

https://twitter.com/SenatorWicker/status/1369770036982915084?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 10, 2021, 08:32:08 PM
Mississippi man touts feature of bill he voted against

https://twitter.com/SenatorWicker/status/1369770036982915084?s=19

This reply in particular is good:

https://twitter.com/BelowTheLaw25/status/1369795931974033410
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 11, 2021, 07:52:47 PM
https://twitter.com/JamaalBowmanNY/status/1370092917193388033?s=19

Cancelling federal student loan debt:

1. Doesn't cost anything

2. Can be done without Congress

3. Upsets shitty people

Cancelling the private debt is more complicated but still checks off #3
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 11, 2021, 07:54:58 PM
https://twitter.com/JamaalBowmanNY/status/1370092917193388033?s=19

Cancelling federal student loan debt:

1. Doesn't cost anything

2. Can be done without Congress

3. Upsets shitty people

Cancelling the private debt is more complicated but still checks off #3
Be a man...pay off your student loans.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 11, 2021, 08:00:00 PM
Be a man...pay off your student loans.
I have no student debt but thank you for demonstrating #3.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 11, 2021, 08:00:51 PM
Be a man...pay off your student loans.
Lolwut
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 11, 2021, 08:04:09 PM
I paid mine off two years ago. After doing that, I agree that everyone's should be cancelled
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 11, 2021, 08:11:53 PM
I paid mine off two years ago. After doing that, I agree that everyone's should be cancelled
I paid mine off a few years ago too...so everyone should have to.

This is the way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 11, 2021, 08:12:27 PM
I have no student debt but thank you for demonstrating #3.
Suck that peepee
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 11, 2021, 08:12:33 PM
I paid mine off a few years ago too...so everyone should have to.

This is the way.
Ok boomer
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 11, 2021, 08:14:38 PM
I love seeing people suffer from student debt....
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 11, 2021, 08:34:03 PM
https://twitter.com/JamaalBowmanNY/status/1370092917193388033?s=19

Cancelling federal student loan debt:

1. Doesn't cost anything

2. Can be done without Congress

3. Upsets shitty people

Cancelling the private debt is more complicated but still checks off #3

Shitty people don't pay back money they borrow

Hippies need to get real degrees that will allow them to contribute to society.

Sorry we don't need more 100,000$ liberal arts degrees so they can be dog walkers
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 11, 2021, 08:51:47 PM
This is why you guys need more cops...to start shooting people not paying their student debts in a timely manner.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 11, 2021, 08:53:00 PM
Shitty people don't pay back money they borrow

Hippies need to get real degrees that will allow them to contribute to society.

Sorry we don't need more 100,000$ liberal arts degrees so they can be dog walkers

Yup, checks all the boxes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 11, 2021, 08:53:53 PM
This is why you guys need more cops...to start shooting people not paying their student debts in a timely manner.

Now a days not paying your loans will just get you elected senator
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 11, 2021, 08:56:03 PM
Shitty people don't pay back money they borrow

Hippies need to get real degrees that will allow them to contribute to society.

Sorry we don't need more 100,000$ liberal arts degrees so they can be dog walkers

Imagine thinking that the only value to education of any kind was its financial return.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 11, 2021, 08:57:07 PM
Imagine thinking that the only value to education of any kind was its financial return.

Odd

I thought I said contribute to society.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 11, 2021, 08:57:33 PM
Imagine thinking that the only value to education of any kind was its financial return.
Not the only value, but the most important one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 11, 2021, 09:01:28 PM
Odd

I thought I said contribute to society.

Imagine thinking that liberal arts degrees don't contribute to society.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 11, 2021, 09:04:12 PM
Imagine thinking that liberal arts degrees don't contribute to society.
They contribute student debt.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 11, 2021, 09:09:36 PM
Imagine thinking that liberal arts degrees don't contribute to society.

Sure if you want to get technical you can argue that literally everything and everyone contributes in some way shape or form (doesn't necessarily mean it's good)

But everything is relative. And there's no freaking question that many skills and areas of knowledge are far more useful than others.

And by all measures the greatest shortages are in science technology engineering and math. And not in the history of cat fur, or whatever the freak this useless excrement all these people are learning.

Imagine what the world would be like today if Oppenheimer and Einstein  were liberal arts majors.

Sure we'd all have funny mustaches, but at least we'd know how to properly use a semicolon
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 11, 2021, 09:10:39 PM
Shitty people don't pay back money they borrow

Hippies need to get real degrees that will allow them to contribute to society.

Sorry we don't need more 100,000$ liberal arts degrees so they can be dog walkers
Cry more bitch
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 11, 2021, 09:12:40 PM
Cry more bitch

Don't worry, Biden is gonna give you guys your free stuff.

If he can remember
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 11, 2021, 09:15:49 PM
Don't worry, Biden is gonna give you guys your free stuff.

If he can remember
I'm sorry people being less immiserated upsets you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 11, 2021, 09:18:43 PM
I'm sorry people being less immiserated upsets you.

If we incentived people to learn skills and education that society desperately needs both those individuals and society would benefit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 11, 2021, 09:41:45 PM
If we incentived people to learn skills and education that society desperately needs both those individuals and society would benefit.

Incentivising people to do certain things and punishing people for doing other things are not the same thing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 11, 2021, 10:44:24 PM
Most other countries don't charge this much for an education and most major universities have consideral financial endowments that could easily cover students' tuitions.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 01:00:56 AM
Incentivising people to do certain things and punishing people for doing other things are not the same thing.

Having someone choose their own pathway to education and allowing them to take financial responsibility for that decision is punishment?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 01:02:02 AM
Most other countries don't charge this much for an education and most major universities have consideral financial endowments that could easily cover students' tuitions.



Many other countries send their children here to get educated
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 12, 2021, 04:34:22 AM
This is why you guys need more cops...to start shooting people not paying their student debts in a timely manner.
I'm pro-shooting people. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 12, 2021, 06:20:20 AM
If we incentived people to learn skills and education that society desperately needs both those individuals and society would benefit.
You can do that and cancel student debt but once again you're unable to hold two thoughts in your mind at the same time. Do one thing to fix past mistakes and do another to prevent future ones.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 12, 2021, 06:37:53 AM
I'm pro-shooting people.
It solves alot of problems
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 12, 2021, 10:14:21 AM
It solves alot of problems
Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 12, 2021, 11:45:16 AM
Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun
Settle down Lauren
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 12, 2021, 11:47:44 AM
Settle down Lauren

he's right
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 12:40:01 PM
You can do that and cancel student debt but once again you're unable to hold two thoughts in your mind at the same time. Do one thing to fix past mistakes and do another to prevent future ones.

The mistake of people taking out loans they can't pay for, and the solution is to have other people pay for them?

Or as you say "doesn't cost anything"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 12, 2021, 01:28:16 PM
Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun

  drama swimming in mao

  by any means necessary
  move over or we'll move over you
  off the pigs

 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 12, 2021, 03:08:08 PM


The mistake of people taking out loans they can't pay for, and the solution is to have other people pay for them?

Or as you say "doesn't cost anything"

Yes, learn how federal spending works. Nobody else has to "pay for" federal student loan debt cancellation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 03:16:40 PM

Yes, learn how federal spending works. Nobody else has to "pay for" federal student loan debt cancellation.

Are you familiar with how a loan works?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 12, 2021, 03:39:26 PM

Yes, learn how federal spending works. Nobody else has to "pay for" federal student loan debt cancellation.

Maybe I'm too simple minded and indeed don't know how federal spending works, but if someone takes out a federal loan for X amount and then has it forgiven, then the federal government didn't get paid back the loan or any interest associated with it.  The federal government doesn't have to pay anything new, but it doesn't get paid what it should have.  The student received a service (an education), and didn't pay back the loan in full to do so.  The student was given an education paid for by whoever funds the government (the people). If you want to argue semantics about whether education should be free, whether someone got a degree that was overpriced, etc, that's a different discussion. 

In my little brain, not getting paid back for something is the same thing as having to pay for something.  The only difference is that you already paid for it instead of having to pay for it in the future.  In the end, said student didn't pay for a service they received, the taxpayer did.  Call it what you want.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 04:35:02 PM
Maybe I'm too simple minded and indeed don't know how federal spending works, but if someone takes out a federal loan for X amount and then has it forgiven, then the federal government didn't get paid back the loan or any interest associated with it.  The federal government doesn't have to pay anything new, but it doesn't get paid what it should have.  The student received a service (an education), and didn't pay back the loan in full to do so.  The student was given an education paid for by whoever funds the government (the people). If you want to argue semantics about whether education should be free, whether someone got a degree that was overpriced, etc, that's a different discussion. 

In my little brain, not getting paid back for something is the same thing as having to pay for something.  The only difference is that you already paid for it instead of having to pay for it in the future.  In the end, said student didn't pay for a service they received, the taxpayer did.  Call it what you want.

Yeah but if they wrote the loan in pencil they can just use an eraser.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 12, 2021, 04:56:23 PM
Maybe I'm too simple minded and indeed don't know how federal spending works, but if someone takes out a federal loan for X amount and then has it forgiven, then the federal government didn't get paid back the loan or any interest associated with it.  The federal government doesn't have to pay anything new, but it doesn't get paid what it should have.  The student received a service (an education), and didn't pay back the loan in full to do so.  The student was given an education paid for by whoever funds the government (the people). If you want to argue semantics about whether education should be free, whether someone got a degree that was overpriced, etc, that's a different discussion. 

In my little brain, not getting paid back for something is the same thing as having to pay for something.  The only difference is that you already paid for it instead of having to pay for it in the future.  In the end, said student didn't pay for a service they received, the taxpayer did.  Call it what you want.
More or less right except taxpayers don't fund federal spending.

So the federal government already paid for these college educations - and it doesn't hurt them to not get paid back, and nobody has to cover it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 12, 2021, 04:58:47 PM
More or less right except taxpayers don't fund federal spending.

So the federal government already paid for these college educations - and it doesn't hurt them to not get paid back, and nobody has to cover it.
Then who does find spending?  Are you arguing that a ballooning Federal deficit doesn't really matter? Federal spending needs to be paid for by either taxes or increasing debt. Money that a student pays back on their debt is money we don't have to collect in taxes or increasing federal debt. I mean, if you are making the argument that it doesn't really matter how much we are in debt we can just print more money, then that's a different argument to me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 12, 2021, 05:00:20 PM
Are you familiar with how a loan works?
Yes, and any lender can forgive a debt.

Your entire position is you personally feel like they shouldn't. You have nothing at stake.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 05:02:10 PM
Yes, and any lender can forgive a debt.

Your entire position is you personally feel like they shouldn't. You have nothing at stake.

I'll support free college if they mandate you get an A in economics and finance
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 12, 2021, 05:04:23 PM
so are you arguing that a ballooning Federal deficit doesn't really matter?
When our federal government spends money it basically spends it into existence. It doesn't need to borrow it or raise taxes 1:1 to cover it.

Federal taxes control inflation and ensure USD maintains value as the only currency US taxes can be paid with. And as a bonus, can prevent anti-democratic behavior from the incredibly wealthy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 12, 2021, 05:05:51 PM
I'll support free college if they mandate you get an A in economics and finance
I love how the idiot reaction to anything more advanced than Econ 101 is "lol learn Econ 101".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 12, 2021, 05:06:34 PM
When our federal government spends money it basically spends it into existence. It doesn't need to borrow it or raise taxes 1:1 to cover it.

Federal taxes control inflation and ensure USD maintains value as the only currency US taxes can be paid with. And as a bonus, can prevent anti-democratic behavior from the incredibly wealthy.
So every single economist that is worried about the ballooning Federal deficit is wrong? If that's the case then let's cancel all federal debts, print money for everyone and stay home and whack off all day.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 12, 2021, 05:08:21 PM
So every single economist that is worried about the ballooning Federal deficit is wrong?
Yes, and many economists do not agree with them. Most handwringing over the deficit is from pundits.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 05:21:42 PM
The federal government should forgive all mortgages and credit card debt

Then we'd live in utopia
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 05:34:36 PM
I love how the idiot reaction to anything more advanced than Econ 101 is "lol learn Econ 101".

Your argument is literally the government can pretend that two trillion dollars in loans don't exist and it doesn't matter

That's literally the equivalent of the covid bill, which is the biggest government mandated redistribution of wealth in history
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 12, 2021, 08:18:26 PM
The number of people who are able to hold the view that governmental budgets can or should be run like household budgets while simultaneously believing that the taxes are too damn high is astonishing.

Household budgets, corporate budgets and government budgets. The only thing they have in common is the word "budgets". They all work completely differently, and the idea that taxpayers are somehow losing out by the erasure of student debt just demonstrates a complete failure to understand the differences. Stick to balancing your checkbook.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 08:47:49 PM
The number of people who are able to hold the view that governmental budgets can or should be run like household budgets while simultaneously believing that the taxes are too damn high is astonishing.

Household budgets, corporate budgets and government budgets. The only thing they have in common is the word "budgets". They all work completely differently, and the idea that taxpayers are somehow losing out by the erasure of student debt just demonstrates a complete failure to understand the differences. Stick to balancing your checkbook.

It's been debated that the almost 2 trillion dollar stimulus bill is going to be a challenge to pay for.

Explain to me how doubling it is a good idea?

And the stimulus bill was only a drop in the bucket

This country's debt has been maddeningly out of control for years. There's concerns now that just paying off the interest is going to chew up the federal budget.

If you guys think giving away 2 trillion to children who don't want to pay for loans they took out is more important than Medicare for all improved infrastructure or whatever government expenditures you can make that argument for sure. But spending 2 trillion to forgive past loans not even to improve actual education seems like an extremely poor use of increasingly limited funds
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 12, 2021, 08:53:17 PM
It's been debated that the almost 2 trillion dollar stimulus bill is going to be a challenge to pay for.

Explain to me how doubling it is a good idea?

Explain to me why you think that the stimulus bill and the erasure of student debt are comparable or in any way related.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 08:55:04 PM
Explain to me why you think that the stimulus bill and the erasure of student debt are comparable or in any way related.

Because their price tags are both almost 2 trillion dollars.

And were talking about national debt being out of control
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 12, 2021, 08:56:45 PM
Because their price tags are both almost 2 trillion dollars.

And were talking about national debt being out of control

OK. Now show me on the budget where the 2 trillion dollars in student loan repayments are reflected.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 08:58:01 PM
OK. Now show me on the budget where the 2 trillion dollars in student loan repayments are reflected.

Page 417 paragraph 8 subsection 9
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 12, 2021, 08:58:12 PM
Please keep proving that you don't understand how federal spending works.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 09:06:45 PM
Not a ton of easily findable great articles explaining the impact

https://www.urban.org/urban-wire/what-would-forgiving-student-debt-mean-federal-budget


But in their summary

Cancelling student debt has no immediate impact on the national debt. The money that funded the loans is already out the door. But the debt will eventually be higher because the debts don’t get paid back. That increase shows up over time when expected future loan payments do not get made.

Political leaders, experts, and commentators differ greatly in their view about deficits and debt. Some believe they matter little with interest rates so low. Others worry deficits and debt can eventually weaken our economic capacity through inflation, reduced domestic investment, or increased reliance on foreign funding.

Cancelling student loans will increase the national debt gradually in the long-term and will increase the deficit in the year the loans are forgiven. Policymakers and advocates should worry about that increase to the same extent they worry about debt increases resulting from other policies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 12, 2021, 09:15:01 PM
Well, I'll give you a point for making the effort. Now do the rest of the work and think about what the other impacts of cancelling student debt would be.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 09:33:02 PM
Well, I'll give you a point for making the effort. Now do the rest of the work and think about what the other impacts of cancelling student debt would be.

So we should get rid of federal mortgages too then?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 12, 2021, 09:44:14 PM
So we should get rid of federal mortgages too then?

Why would you think that this is an appropriate comparison?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 12, 2021, 10:05:46 PM
Why would you think that this is an appropriate comparison?

The same things that will happen if you cancel student loans would happen if you canceled mortgages.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 12, 2021, 10:23:27 PM
The same things that will happen if you cancel student loans would happen if you canceled mortgages.

This is a phenomenally stupid take.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 13, 2021, 09:59:44 AM
This is a phenomenally stupid take.

dcm is phenomenally stupid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on March 13, 2021, 01:51:51 PM
dcm is phenomenally stupid.

Whether he/she(?) is legitimately stupid we don't know, since we're not his parents or doctors or teachers.

However, as I might have expressed before, dcm is clearly leaning hard into his little role/reputation here as "resident dumbfuck on a niche sports team forum", so god bless him for whatever satisfaction that brings. I'm a charitable guy, so i contribute much of his "hEy GaiZ LooK at mY XtRa ChroMosOmE lolzz!!" schtick to half-assed trolling.
We should be happy he hasn't yet accidentally stumbled into a big barrel of covid while licking an oversized lollipop.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 13, 2021, 03:57:12 PM
Whether he/she(?) is legitimately stupid we don't know, since we're not his parents or doctors or teachers.

However, as I might have expressed before, dcm is clearly leaning hard into his little role/reputation here as "resident dumbfuck on a niche sports team forum", so god bless him for whatever satisfaction that brings. I'm a charitable guy, so i contribute much of his "hEy GaiZ LooK at mY XtRa ChroMosOmE lolzz!!" schtick to half-assed trolling.
We should be happy he hasn't yet accidentally stumbled into a big barrel of covid while licking an oversized lollipop.

I'm going to imagine this in far more detail than I should.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 13, 2021, 04:36:26 PM
Dcm is a good lady/guy.  We all have our issues.  I'm borderline retarded, and I fit right in.  Puck bangs chickens.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 13, 2021, 04:45:17 PM
Dcm is a good lady/guy.  We all have our issues.  I'm borderline retarded, and I fit right in.  Puck bangs chickens.


Stop making what Puck does sound consensual.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 13, 2021, 04:58:50 PM
Stop making what Puck does sound consensual.
Those roosters had it coming.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 13, 2021, 05:21:00 PM
Dcm is a good lady/guy.  We all have our issues.  I'm borderline retarded, and I fit right in.

 Puck bangs chickens.

  https://twitter.com/nytchicken
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 13, 2021, 07:54:45 PM
Sorry I'll try to be smarterer and only buy into the hive mind mentality here.

WUT YOU DON'T KNOW HOW THE FEDERAL GOVT WORKS, MONEY IS FREE

I know everyone on here thinks they're freaking brilliant, but this is basically reddit but older.

I have no issue learning, thinking or changing my mind. But there's way too much knowitallism on here. If you don't agree with everything I think then you're freaking wrong and stupid mentality.

By far the biggest reason why politics is a putrid toxic miserable subject. Probably also part of why like 4 people regularly post on here too
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 13, 2021, 08:05:06 PM
Sorry I'll try to be smarterer and only buy into the hive mind mentality here.

WUT YOU DON'T KNOW HOW THE FEDERAL GOVT WORKS, MONEY IS FREE
I still believe if you borrow money,  you pay it back.  I don't care if it's for basket weaving or engineering.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 13, 2021, 08:39:54 PM
I still believe if you borrow money,  you pay it back.  I don't care if it's for basket weaving or engineering.

There's a reasonable and unreasonable way to go about things.

I don't think it's an unreasonable opinion to think college should be free in the United States.

But the way to do that isn't to wave a magic wand and say all student loans should disappear because the federal money doesn't count.

You come up with a process, and implement it going forward. Make public community colleges free period with bachelor/advanced degrees free under certain parameters.

Involve GPA/grade requirements, make it applicable only to public schools, have certain requirements for residence/citizenship etc. Whatever the rules are is freaking irrelevant for this argument, you make rules, make a process, budget and implement it going forward.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 15, 2021, 01:22:18 PM
 
 https://www.lohud.com/story/news/politics/albany/2021/03/15/voters-cuomo-dont-resign-over-scandal-new-poll-shows/4700795001/


 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 15, 2021, 08:03:49 PM


I have no issue learning, thinking or changing my mind.

Good, learn Modern Monetary Theory.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 16, 2021, 02:45:57 PM
The House Oversight Committee will convene on 22 March to discuss DC Statehood.

Meanwhile, Representative Dusty Johnson (R-SD) has introduced a bill to repeal the 23rd Amendment which would bar citizens of DC from voting in the Presidential election.

Again, the Republican Party shows its hand that only through voter suppression do they have a chance to win a popular election.

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210316/c58f7577326562ec014a3deed25ad729.jpg)

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 16, 2021, 04:13:58 PM
i wonder what the excuse theyll use is? i wonder how many morons think its like, the country columbia?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 16, 2021, 04:50:55 PM
i wonder what the excuse theyll use is? i wonder how many morons think its like, the country columbia?
Maybe they'll just be as blatant as their lawyers were at the Supreme Court oral arguments a couple of weeks ago.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on March 16, 2021, 05:11:10 PM
Maybe they'll just be as blatant as their lawyers were at the Supreme Court oral arguments a couple of weeks ago.

Sent from my Pixel 5 using Tapatalk

You mean the same side that has congressional representatives touting how good the stimulus bill is for their constituents--despite the fact they argued and voted against it?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 17, 2021, 07:58:25 AM
Bad news for dcm

https://twitter.com/MariaHalkias/status/1371887998804099072?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 19, 2021, 09:32:52 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/19/twitter-suspends-gop-rep-marjorie-taylor-greene.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 19, 2021, 10:21:39 AM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/03/19/twitter-suspends-gop-rep-marjorie-taylor-greene.html

  ^ Looking at her pix in that article, I've seen better head on cattle.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on March 19, 2021, 12:27:23 PM
  ^ Looking at her pix in that article, I've seen better head on cattle.

She's clearly a dude.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 19, 2021, 12:38:49 PM
She's clearly a dude.
Her camel toe has balls.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 23, 2021, 10:01:57 AM
rUn It LiKe A bUsInEsS

https://twitter.com/jacobbogage/status/1374171869969068035?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 23, 2021, 10:02:45 AM
Why is he still in power?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 23, 2021, 10:16:07 AM
Why is he still in power?

Norms.

Biden has to nominate the rest of the board of governors who then have to vote to fire Dejoy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 23, 2021, 06:38:32 PM
What are optics?

https://twitter.com/ccadelago/status/1374492329097060359?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 23, 2021, 07:12:14 PM
They could have asked litterally anyone else
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 23, 2021, 07:28:11 PM
They could have asked litterally anyone else
Chris Brown wasn't available
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 23, 2021, 07:56:50 PM
Chris Brown wasn't available
Deshaun will do it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 25, 2021, 08:28:45 PM
https://twitter.com/tedcruz/status/1375160807059681286?s=21

Strongly considering getting one of these to wear just to see people’s reactions
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 26, 2021, 07:17:48 AM
Georgia trying really hard to make Jim Crow a thing again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 26, 2021, 07:41:02 AM
Georgia trying really hard to make Jim Crow a thing again.
We are on a beach trip in Georgia right now.  This state is a different world.  Beautiful beach though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 26, 2021, 08:12:10 AM
We are on a beach trip in Georgia right now.  This state is a different world.  Beautiful beach though.
Did you drink your mandatory daily gallon of sweet tea yet?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 26, 2021, 08:19:14 AM
We are on a beach trip in Georgia right now.  This state is a different world.  Beautiful beach though.

bleeeedat
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 26, 2021, 08:25:53 AM
Did you drink your mandatory daily gallon of sweet tea yet?
I hate that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 26, 2021, 09:18:22 AM
Did you drink your mandatory daily gallon of sweet tea yet?
Since I moved from NC to VA, I've gradually converted to unsweet tea. Mainly so I didn't get tha beetus. My parents were ashamed of me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 26, 2021, 11:45:09 AM
More GA being GA

https://twitter.com/carterforva/status/1375247641114783748?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 26, 2021, 12:00:08 PM
John Lewis Voting Rights Act, please.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 29, 2021, 07:51:50 PM
https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1376649057775587332?s=19


excrement hole state, freak this noise.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 29, 2021, 08:31:51 PM
https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1376649057775587332?s=19


excrement hole state, freak this noise.
I agree with every word of this post.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 29, 2021, 08:56:13 PM
Very normal, very cool

https://twitter.com/laurenboebert/status/1376641255514517505?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 29, 2021, 09:17:08 PM
Very normal, very cool

https://twitter.com/laurenboebert/status/1376641255514517505?s=19

I know I've posted it before, but still.

http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 29, 2021, 09:19:38 PM
I know I've posted it before, but still.

http://www.qwghlm.co.uk/toys/dailymail/

COULD PAEDOPHILES KILL THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY?

WILL THE POLES GIVE ENGLAND CANCER?

ARE WORKING MOTHERS GIVING THE MIDDLE CLASS CANCER?

WILL THE UNIONS HAVE SEX WITH THE QUEEN?



i enjoyed this, thank you
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 29, 2021, 09:30:38 PM
My 2 favorite things about that tweet are A. Accidentally(?) aligning herself with Nazis (the group that the German communists were opposing) and B. perfectly acting out the fascist rhetoric stereotype of "the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”

weak baby soy gay beta cuck DANGEROUS ISIS TERRORISTS THAT WILL DESTROY OUR WAY OF LIFE
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 29, 2021, 11:41:26 PM
My 2 favorite things about that tweet are A. Accidentally(?) aligning herself with Nazis (the group that the German communists were opposing) and B. perfectly acting out the fascist rhetoric stereotype of "the enemies are at the same time too strong and too weak.”

weak baby soy gay beta cuck DANGEROUS ISIS TERRORISTS THAT WILL DESTROY OUR WAY OF LIFE
She's tard Palin
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 30, 2021, 04:28:31 AM
https://twitter.com/ACLU/status/1376649057775587332?s=19


excrement hole state, freak this noise.

"health care"

I.e. if your 9 year old wants puberty blockers, you're powerless to stop them according to the state.

Who the freak thinks this is a good idea?

Boebert's mostly right btw for anyone actually interested, though she'd have been better off using someone like Bela Kun, Ceausescu (or his queynte wife) or even Mao or Stalin as more clear examples of what she's talking about re: the regressive, totalitarian nature of ANTIFA and the larger ideology they subscribe too.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 30, 2021, 08:08:56 AM
"health care"

I.e. if your 9 year old wants puberty blockers, you're powerless to stop them according to the state.

Who the freak thinks this is a good idea?

nobody because thats not reality. no dr is giving these things out to 9 year olds without permission from family or with multiple drs being consulted. do you honestly think 9 year olds are rolling up to the clinic in their big wheels and leaving with a bag of pills to stop puberty?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 30, 2021, 04:59:06 PM
Matt Gartz, 17 year old girl, sexual relationship, paid for her to cross state lines.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/30/us/politics/matt-gaetz-sex-trafficking-investigation.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on March 30, 2021, 05:08:45 PM
freak that guy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 30, 2021, 05:22:52 PM
Matt Gartz, 17 year old girl, sexual relationship, paid for her to cross state lines.

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/03/30/us/politics/matt-gaetz-sex-trafficking-investigation.html

This story that I saw earlier today makes more sense now.

https://www.axios.com/matt-gaetz-retirement-congress-newsmax-e1a0e6bb-0279-4e97-ab22-508e28f4347a.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 30, 2021, 05:41:45 PM
freak that guy

https://twitter.com/mattgaetz/status/1375094924882874375?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 30, 2021, 06:46:57 PM
https://twitter.com/kimberlygivant/status/1377035176656654338?s=21 (https://twitter.com/kimberlygivant/status/1377035176656654338?s=21)

https://twitter.com/maxasteele/status/1377030761564504065?s=21 (https://twitter.com/maxasteele/status/1377030761564504065?s=21)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on March 30, 2021, 06:49:21 PM
holdup, i thought the democrats and hollywood were the pedophiles
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 30, 2021, 06:53:02 PM
Greene and Bobert must be so confused right now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 30, 2021, 07:10:32 PM
Greene and Bobert must be so confused right now.
The accuser is a crisis actor obviously.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 30, 2021, 07:14:50 PM
Greene and Bobert must be so confused right now.
Boebert is just confused because this is a love story to her.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 30, 2021, 07:17:00 PM
I wonder how Nestor is handling all of this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 30, 2021, 07:20:07 PM
I wonder how Nestor is handling all of this.
It's always the spouses who suffer the most in these situations
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 30, 2021, 07:23:53 PM
https://twitter.com/mattgaetz/status/1377030477257773065?s=21

Big If True
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on March 30, 2021, 07:26:51 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ExwyVzIWYAI7gO7?format=jpg&name=900x900)

lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 30, 2021, 08:27:59 PM
If that is real, it did NOT age well.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 30, 2021, 08:51:39 PM
Gaetz (Gase?) is on Tucker Carlson lmao

https://twitter.com/numbersmuncher/status/1377067209130905604?s=21

Carlsons face this whole clip is priceless
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 30, 2021, 08:54:28 PM
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1377061068825096196?s=21

Thread of the interview, lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 30, 2021, 09:03:46 PM
i like he revealed an allegation no one had of yet, the child prostitute pics.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 30, 2021, 09:15:58 PM
Quote
@mattgaetz
Over the past several weeks my family and I have been victims of an organized criminal extortion involving a former DOJ official seeking $25 million while threatening to smear my name.

We have been cooperating with federal authorities in this matter...


but wait...


Quote
@DavidCornDC
It was the Trump Justice Department under Trump AG Bill Barr that launched the investigation of Trump ally @mattgaetz. Must be political, right?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 30, 2021, 09:40:20 PM
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1377078080972406788?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on March 31, 2021, 08:53:08 AM
stolen from reddit, re gates interview

Quote
0:15 - Tucker acknowledges that this is a breaking story and there are very few details known so far. He has no background on the story so far, and not even any informed questions he can ask (his own words.)

That seems like good journalistic practice, doesn't it? Inviting an accused predator on to give his side of the story, when you don't even know the details of what he's accused of, and can't ask informed questions.

0:45 - Gaetz says the allegations are a lie and the result of someone trying to extort millions of dollars from his family. He says his father was contacted by a former DOJ official who tried to blackmail them. Gaetz's family went to the FBI and they had his father wear a wire. He calls on the FBI to release those recordings, and he identifies the alleged blackmailer by name.

3:45 - Gaetz says the prosecutor who was extorting him claimed he could make the investigation go away, that he had contacts within the Biden administration, that he could get Gaetz a pardon from Biden.

4:00 - Gaetz says he's not the only person on-screen right now who has been accused of sexual misconduct as a way to smear them and remove them from the political conversation.

4:40 - Tucker clarifies that what Gaetz is referring to is a mentally ill viewer, whom he had never met, who accused him of a sex crime some 20 years ago.

5:00 - Tucker asks Gaetz the specifics of the allegations.

5:10 - Gaetz says the only thing he knows on that score is what he was able to read in the New York Times story. (Which seems odd? If you're claiming that a guy is trying to blackmail you, wouldn't the guy have given you some specifics of what he is blackmailing you over?)

Gaetz spends almost no time trying to answer Tucker's question here, and immediately pivots to telling a story about how he had dinner with Tucker and his wife 2 years ago. He only brings this up because the girl he brought to that dinner, he says, was later strong-armed by the FBI in an attempt to get her to give evidence against Gaetz in a pay-for-play scheme.

6:00 - Tucker says he has no memory of that dinner.

6:10 - Tucker asks who the 17 year old girl is who is referenced in the allegations.

6:30 - Gaetz claims the girl doesn't exist.


it really seems like tucker said freak it and decided to let gaetz freak himself over hard by just talking and exposing himself, knowing gaetz is a freaking moron and would do that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 31, 2021, 12:45:43 PM
stolen from reddit, re gates interview


it really seems like tucker said freak it and decided to let gaetz freak himself over hard by just talking and exposing himself, knowing gaetz is a freaking moron and would do that.

^  Yup, that's what I took from it.  Pleasantly surprised how Tucker crossed up Gaetz by telling him he didn't remember Gaetz's dinner companion

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1377061068825096196 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 31, 2021, 11:40:33 PM
"I'm one of the good ones!"

https://twitter.com/gromerjeffers/status/1377431392489996289?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 02, 2021, 09:53:17 AM
I wonder how this infrastructure plan will be changed once it has to go through reconciliation?  Zero chance of getting GOP to vote for anything even remotely resembling it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 02, 2021, 09:55:24 AM
I wonder how this infrastructure plan will be changed once it has to go through reconciliation?  Zero chance of getting GOP to vote for anything even remotely resembling it.
At Manchin's mercy again. And some idiots will defend his actions as if the voters of WV just hate infrastructure or something.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 02, 2021, 10:02:16 AM
At Manchin's mercy again. And some idiots will defend his actions as if the voters of WV just hate infrastructure or something.

I think they can placate Manchin and get some dumbed-down version of it passed via reconciliation (if they are allowed to do a 2nd reconciliation this year).  They can't do anything to it to get a single GOP vote because it has a D attached to it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 02, 2021, 10:53:13 AM
I think they can placate Manchin and get some dumbed-down version of it passed via reconciliation (if they are allowed to do a 2nd reconciliation this year).  They can't do anything to it to get a single GOP vote because it has a D attached to it.
I think you're right. Just remains to be seen how dumbed-down.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 02, 2021, 11:38:51 AM
It's not even a proper infrastructure bill because it contains funding for, like, housing and pipes and stuff.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 02, 2021, 12:24:21 PM
Jmho but as far as
I think they can placate Manchin and get some dumbed-down version of it passed via reconciliation (if they are allowed to do a 2nd reconciliation this year).  They can't do anything to it to get a single GOP vote because it has a D attached to it.
Agree there's always going to be GOP blowback based solely on the 'D' factor but (call me naive) I also think that any elected official with "political expediency chops" won't be so resolute in voting against a long-overdue infrastructure bill altogether; it depends on:

- how much of this 'infrastructure bill' do they view as not infrastructure-related but more special interest pork barrel
- how much of the above constitutes what you & Badger describe as 'dumbing down'

I think the idea of addressing the long-overdue issue of infrastructure remediation isn't altogether GOP-abhorrent (or shouldn't be), again I just think it's a matter of agreeing where to cut the wheat from the chafe (unless one goes into it thinking the bill's 100% pure to begin with).  Myself, I don't know it there's any (e.g.) 'protect the Himalayan Octopus' special interest provision that's been slipped into it, I'm only thinking that there's the possibility of at least "if you can't get 6, take 5" compromise that sets the overwhelming portion of the bill in motion (with the outstanding 'pork barrel or not' issues to be hammered out later) and that it won't rest solely on Joe Manchen's vote (again, call me optimistically naive).  Ramble reads clear as mud : )  but jmho.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 02, 2021, 12:29:36 PM
The bill could be called "Free Blowjobs and $100 bills for only the GOP" and the GOP wouldn't vote for it because it's a Democrat bill.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 02, 2021, 12:42:53 PM
The bill could be called "Free Blowjobs and $100 bills for only the GOP" and the GOP wouldn't vote for it because it's a Democrat bill.

haha  sorry.....lost my head    ; )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u7klm1GS3v8
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 02, 2021, 02:32:30 PM
This is amazing.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/alabama-yoga-ban-school-hinduism-b1825334.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 02, 2021, 04:30:10 PM
This is amazing.

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/alabama-yoga-ban-school-hinduism-b1825334.html
Cancel culture has gone too far
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 02, 2021, 04:50:42 PM
Lol, not a single republican should vote for this farce of an "infrastructure bill" because it's freaking garbage.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 02, 2021, 04:58:30 PM
Lol, not a single republican should vote for this farce of an "infrastructure bill" because it's freaking garbage.

Well obviously they won't, but not for the reason you claim.

The bill could be called "Free Blowjobs and $100 bills for only the GOP" and the GOP wouldn't vote for it because it's a Democrat bill.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 02, 2021, 05:18:56 PM
What if it was the 2021 Troop, Cop, Coal Miner, and Landlord Respecting Act?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 02, 2021, 05:20:59 PM
What if it was the 2021 Troop, Cop, Coal Miner, and Landlord Respecting Act?
Tax cuttin', coal rollin', Jesus Act of murica.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 02, 2021, 05:23:20 PM
The Dims just want devil titties and Teslas made by trannies that use American flags as tampons for their dickginas.  And Black people stuff.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 03, 2021, 09:19:39 AM
The Dims just want devil titties and Teslas made by trannies that use American flags as tampons for their dickginas.  And Black people stuff.

Yup, that's what it is.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 05, 2021, 12:00:17 PM
Big retard energy

https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/1379075670014357507?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 05, 2021, 12:18:59 PM
Big retard energy

https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/1379075670014357507?s=19

I know, thinking voter ID is racist is yuge retard energy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 05, 2021, 12:25:08 PM
I know, thinking voter ID is racist is yuge retard energy.
Policies that disproportionately hurt black people are, in fact, racist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 05, 2021, 03:28:16 PM
Arkansas Governor vetoes bill banning health care to trans youth. Veto override likely.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/04/05/trans-healthcare-arkansas-governor-veto/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2021/04/05/trans-healthcare-arkansas-governor-veto/)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 05, 2021, 03:45:15 PM
https://twitter.com/pattonoswalt/status/1379162784403910656?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 05, 2021, 04:34:13 PM
Policies that disproportionately hurt black people are, in fact, racist.

Let me understand this, it's your contention that any policy requiring an ID is racist?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 05, 2021, 04:34:58 PM
Let me understand this, it's your contention that any policy requiring an ID is racist?
Strawmen are also racist
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 05, 2021, 05:00:41 PM
Strawmen are also racist

That's not a strawman. Your assertion is that its racist to consider utilizing means of identification (not even same day mind you, but the use of a license or state issued identification number on a mail-in ballot) in order to verify whether or not someone is who they say they are when they vote. Why is it not racist in any other aspect?


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 05, 2021, 05:58:49 PM
The bill as written would reduce turnout of black voters and the touted reasoning for the bill is widely exaggerated voter fraud. You're not convincing anyone by pretending this isn't the case. Every bill that makes it more difficult to vote is anti-democratic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 05, 2021, 07:53:44 PM
The bill as written would reduce turnout of black voters and the touted reasoning for the bill is widely exaggerated voter fraud. You're not convincing anyone by pretending this isn't the case. Every bill that makes it more difficult to vote is anti-democratic.

AGREE WITH THE CRAFTED POINT THAT COMPLETELY IGNORES THE SOCIOPOLITICAL REPURCUSSIONS OR ADMIT YOU HATE AMERICA!!!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 05, 2021, 08:16:23 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2021/04/05/politics/senate-parliamentarian-democrats-amend-budget-resolution-infrastructure/index.html

Parliamentarian gives Democrats potential new tool for reconciliation in early ruling


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 06, 2021, 04:00:36 PM
https://twitter.com/NOgnanovich/status/1379459627964850179?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 06, 2021, 04:11:47 PM
Look at his head.  Look at it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 06, 2021, 07:21:08 PM
https://twitter.com/NOgnanovich/status/1379459627964850179?s=19

Republicans: Give me money so I can represent your views on the Hill

Also Republicans: No not those views
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 07, 2021, 07:45:43 AM
The bill as written would reduce turnout of black voters and the touted reasoning for the bill is widely exaggerated voter fraud. You're not convincing anyone by pretending this isn't the case. Every bill that makes it more difficult to vote is anti-democratic.

The bill as written would do no such thing, unless it's your contention that Black people are incapable of getting an ID and therefore incapable of going to an R rated movie. The low expectations that come with this assertion.

Anyway, the last comment is absolutist nonsense. Voter ID isn't anti-democratic, in fact, leaving a process so incredibly wide open to fraud no matter how much you want to join the legacy media in poo-poo'ing the reality, is anti-democratic.

This is about manipulating a mid-term to attempt to ensure that the historical trend of the party in the executive branch getting BTFO doesn't happen. Blatantly naked power grab made all the more infuriating by Biden continually lying about it by referring to it as "JiM CrOw" while trying to submit that people should have vaccination report cards (which I'm in favor for TBH), in order to return to their way of life pre-pandemic. 

AGREE WITH THE CRAFTED POINT THAT COMPLETELY IGNORES THE SOCIOPOLITICAL REPURCUSSIONS OR ADMIT YOU HATE AMERICA!!!!

Lol, low info seaman strikes again.

You use politicians as avatars and refer to them as national treasures, who cares what shitbag statist bootlicker thinks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 07, 2021, 08:30:46 AM
This is the kind of guy centrists are desperate to appeal to

https://twitter.com/MayorJohnLee/status/1379577637664817153?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on April 07, 2021, 08:40:45 AM
leaving a process so incredibly wide open to fraud

can you provide some links of all this fraud? evidence perhaps? i've only seen a smattering of fraud cases totaling maybe a dozen votes for republicans. maybe i've missed it, but i imagine there must be significant, provable fraud to keep pushing this rhetoric.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on April 07, 2021, 10:25:12 AM
When you turn 18 years old in the United States, you are required to head to your local post office and fill out a card making you eligible for the draft.

Coincidentally, you also become eligible to vote and are required by most jurisdictions to carry an ID on you.

So why, at the point in time that you fill out that card, are you not given a valid federal ID card and immediately registered to vote?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on April 07, 2021, 09:21:22 PM
When you turn 18 years old in the United States, you are required to head to your local post office and fill out a card making you eligible for the draft.

Coincidentally, you also become eligible to vote and are required by most jurisdictions to carry an ID on you.

So why, at the point in time that you fill out that card, are you not given a valid federal ID card and immediately registered to vote?

fwiw, when i was 17, the feds mailed me something and i just sent it back and bada bing bada boom
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 08, 2021, 08:17:35 PM
Quote
In two late-night Venmo transactions in May 2018, Rep. Matt Gaetz sent his friend, the accused sex trafficker Joel Greenberg, $900. The next morning, over the course of eight minutes, Greenberg used the same app to send three young women varying sums of money. In total, the transactions amounted to $900.

The memo field for the first of Gaetz’s transactions to Greenberg was titled “Test.” In the second, the Florida GOP congressman wrote “hit up ___.” But instead of a blank, Gaetz wrote a nickname for one of the recipients. (The Daily Beast is not sharing that nickname because the teenager had only turned 18 less than six months before.) When Greenberg then made his Venmo payments to these three young women, he described the money as being for “Tuition,” “School,” and “School.”

https://twitter.com/sollenbergerrc/status/1380306538800279552?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 08, 2021, 08:19:52 PM
https://twitter.com/mepfuller/status/1380315430661853185?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 08, 2021, 10:41:47 PM
https://twitter.com/mepfuller/status/1380315430661853185?s=21
@gaetzwhispers
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 08, 2021, 10:59:07 PM
https://twitter.com/mepfuller/status/1380315430661853185?s=21

https://twitter.com/TrueFactsStated/status/1380155412205371392
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 08, 2021, 11:23:33 PM
When your political worldview is extremely coherent

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210409/94e48ed223445bd44d2c2eddec22e250.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 09, 2021, 04:20:54 PM
When your political worldview is extremely coherent

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210409/94e48ed223445bd44d2c2eddec22e250.jpg)

When your shirt wears you


.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on April 09, 2021, 05:06:00 PM
When your political worldview is extremely coherent

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210409/94e48ed223445bd44d2c2eddec22e250.jpg)

Where's Waldo on the Political Spectrum?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 09, 2021, 06:27:42 PM
When your shirt wears you


.
Good one, Yakov
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on April 09, 2021, 07:21:27 PM
Good one, Yakov
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210410/cdd946dc0a56268705b613a92dddffc7.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 11, 2021, 08:35:48 PM
https://deadspin.com/we-are-sorry-to-report-that-herschel-walker-might-run-f-1846661774
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 11, 2021, 10:56:24 PM
If he ran for a seat that was already R I'd support it just for laughs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 12, 2021, 01:19:31 PM
Nice.

What I'm really hoping for is for studios to pull filming from Georgia.

https://www.newsweek.com/will-smith-emancipation-first-movie-exit-georgia-voting-laws-1582868
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 13, 2021, 08:27:54 AM
Villain rotation in effect

https://theintercept.com/2021/04/12/pro-act-mark-kelly-angus-king-dsa/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 15, 2021, 08:03:08 AM
https://deadspin.com/we-are-sorry-to-report-that-herschel-walker-might-run-f-1846661774

LISTEN TO BLACK VOICES!!

...not that voice.


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 15, 2021, 08:29:39 AM
(https://fanbuzz.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2019/09/sammy-sosa-now.png?w=1200&h=627&crop=1)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on April 15, 2021, 08:35:01 AM
(https://fanbuzz.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2019/09/sammy-sosa-now.png?w=1200&h=627&crop=1)

Michael Jackson?


*yes i know it's Sammy Sosa*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 15, 2021, 09:40:14 AM
(https://fanbuzz.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2019/09/sammy-sosa-now.png?w=1200&h=627&crop=1)

Hahahahahahahahahaha.

I love how he's totally tried to no-sell it like "skin color change, lol wut? what are you talking about?"

Weirdest thing ever.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 15, 2021, 10:46:07 AM
https://twitter.com/NoahShachtman/status/1382713472056709123?s=19

shockedpikachu.jpg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 15, 2021, 04:16:47 PM
(https://fanbuzz.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/5/2019/09/sammy-sosa-now.png?w=1200&h=627&crop=1)
(https://media.giphy.com/media/LSul26beDR8jRJNDTX/giphy.gif)

Sammy Sosa's now Skippy So-so.   What a marooon.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 16, 2021, 04:11:59 PM
https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1382886393156878338?s=21

2 shitheads
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 16, 2021, 04:16:41 PM
https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1382886393156878338?s=21

2 shitheads

I'm curious the reasoning, but I think it'll just pee me off.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 16, 2021, 04:22:20 PM
I'm curious the reasoning, but I think it'll just pee me off.

Conservative voters have elected the living embodiment of a pair of 4chan trolls, they're doing exactly what 4chan trolls would do.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 16, 2021, 04:42:34 PM


Conservative voters have elected the living embodiment of a pair of 8chan trolls, they're doing exactly what 8chan trolls would do.

FTFY
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 16, 2021, 04:52:55 PM

FTFY

I'll defer to your greater knowledge, I couldn't tell you the difference.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 16, 2021, 05:25:49 PM
I'm curious the reasoning, but I think it'll just pee me off.
There's fine print in the bill that makes Ilhan Omar president now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on April 16, 2021, 05:57:22 PM
I'll defer to your greater knowledge, I couldn't tell you the difference.

think it's 8kun now
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 16, 2021, 07:36:01 PM
think it's 8kun now

You're probably right.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 17, 2021, 11:42:50 AM
How far do the elected fascists have to go before their party actually does something about them?

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewsolender/2021/04/17/america-first-caucus-rejected-even-by-right-wing-freedom-caucus/?sh=5c55f18b36a8
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 19, 2021, 09:08:53 AM
That Maxine Waters is a real treat.

And by treat, I do mean vile, disgusting queynte.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on April 19, 2021, 09:22:36 AM
That Maxine Waters is a real treat.

And by treat, I do mean vile, disgusting queynte.
Why?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 19, 2021, 09:23:26 AM
Why?
She's activating the antifa super soldiers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 19, 2021, 09:28:14 AM
She's activating the antifa super soldiers.

Lol, as if that would ever be a concern. You see what your common "antifa super soldier" looks like? Absolute bottom of the barrel when it comes to humanity.

No call me old fashioned, but I just find it disgusting when a sitting politician is going to both wade into an open case by delivering a verdict while a jury has still yet to reach a determination, and by essentially fanning the flames by essentially saying that without verdict X, we're "going to get more confrontational" in a city that already literally has a demonstrated body count and financial bottom line from the last summer of riots.

I look forward to the comparisons towards the rhetoric of a certain ex-President and the faux "insherrrection!!!" as if its even freaking close.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 19, 2021, 02:27:58 PM
She's activating the antifa super soldiers.
I'm sure there will be plenty of Proud Bois ready to protect the area from people throwing plastic bags.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 19, 2021, 03:53:53 PM
https://twitter.com/WSJ/status/1384248352171167753?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 26, 2021, 01:34:22 PM
https://twitter.com/JasonSCampbell/status/1386685340522536961?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 26, 2021, 02:16:53 PM
https://twitter.com/SamanthaJoRoth/status/1386760584889262080?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 26, 2021, 03:26:44 PM
https://twitter.com/SamanthaJoRoth/status/1386760584889262080?s=19
Texas and Florida were expected to each gain one more seat than they did.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 28, 2021, 07:32:08 PM
The fact that I can't decide whether this is real is concerning:

(https://i.imgur.com/K3j6AqM.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 28, 2021, 07:33:32 PM
Where might these sex blimps be located?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 28, 2021, 07:36:17 PM
Where might these sex blimps be located?

I need to know more about them to understand whether I'm willing to give up lasagna. Also, will gays want to go to restaurants if lasagna isn't available? I'm not sure they've thought this through properly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 28, 2021, 07:53:13 PM
I need to know more about them to understand whether I'm willing to give up lasagna. Also, will gays want to go to restaurants if lasagna isn't available? I'm not sure they've thought this through properly.
Gays love meat in their mouths.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 29, 2021, 01:13:00 PM
No fan of Pence but hello Ray Bradbury...

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/apr/27/simon-and-schuster-staff-campaign-against-book-deal-mike-pence


Gays love meat in their mouths.
   and meat in the seat
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 29, 2021, 01:14:19 PM


No fan of Pence but hello Ray Bradbury...

https://www.theguardian.com/books/2021/apr/27/simon-and-schuster-staff-campaign-against-book-deal-mike-pence

tHiS iS eXaCtLy LiKe 1984
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 29, 2021, 01:22:27 PM

tHiS iS eXaCtLy LiKe 1984

 The mentality behind it was my point and was/is skewered nevertheless.  And yes, cancel culture applies here as well. 

  First amendment isn't only "my team" applicable.     
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 29, 2021, 01:27:57 PM
The mentality behind it was my point and was/is skewered nevertheless.  And yes, cancel culture applies here as well. 

  First amendment isn't only "my team" applicable.   
What does the first amendment have to do with it?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 29, 2021, 01:37:15 PM
The mentality behind it was my point and was/is skewered nevertheless.  And yes, cancel culture applies here as well. 

  First amendment isn't only "my team" applicable.     

Didn't the Supreme Court already rule that it was permissible to make business decisions on matters of conscience, or does that only apply when it's the gays wanting nuptial confectionery?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 29, 2021, 01:39:56 PM
Didn't the Supreme Court already rule that it was permissible to make business decisions on matters of conscience, or does that only apply when it's the gays wanting nuptial confectionery?
You're giving this more credence than it deserves - 1A has nothing to do with Pence losing a publishing deal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 29, 2021, 02:10:14 PM
Again, I'm talking about the mentality behind this type thinking: this cancel culture--yes 'cancel culture'--mentality.  The "I don't like your politics so I'm going to call on Simon & Shuster to 'cancel' your book deal" mentality.  JE, you can project and deflect about wedding cake schlongs but that's an apples & oranges stretch here.  And Badger, Mike Pence didn't lose his book deal but if he did it would smack of a 1st amendment abridgment. An agreement was already in place.  Again, no fan of Pence but cxlding a book deal simply based on indignation among the woke ranks would give pause. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 29, 2021, 02:12:41 PM
Again, I'm talking about the mentality behind this type thinking: this cancel culture--yes 'cancel culture'--mentality.  The "I don't like your politics so I'm going to call on Simon & Shuster to 'cancel' your book deal" mentality.  JE, you can project and deflect about wedding cake schlongs but that's an apples & oranges stretch here.  And Badger, Mike Pence didn't lose his book deal but if he did it would smack of a 1st amendment abridgment. An agreement was already in place.  Again, no fan of Pence but cxlding a book deal simply based on indignation among the woke ranks would give pause.
What does breach of contract have to do with 1A?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 29, 2021, 02:26:46 PM
What does breach of contract have to do with 1A?

Yes he can say what he wants in the general sense of the word but I'm referring to the 'literary theater' that's the backdrop here...again, the mentality i.e. the mindset behind an inhibiting "shut him down" group think. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on May 01, 2021, 02:19:03 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/brahmresnik/status/1388212363212382208

ex GOP State Rep. Anthony Kern was counting ballots(that he may have been on? theres claims but no confirmation), also managed to make it to the Jan 6 insurrection.


GOP, bunch of terrorists
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 02, 2021, 11:14:37 AM
The latest in definitely not voter suppression news

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1388206519343144962?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 03, 2021, 11:21:46 AM
https://twitter.com/sengillibrand/status/1389233155211763713?s=21

Weirdo energy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 03, 2021, 11:33:27 AM
I'm a tired family
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on May 03, 2021, 11:36:03 AM
I'm a tired family
hoo-ha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 04, 2021, 07:07:48 AM
https://twitter.com/shoe0nhead/status/1389446404469362691?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 04, 2021, 07:12:19 AM
https://twitter.com/shoe0nhead/status/1389446404469362691?s=21
Debating starting a side hustle writing fanfic for liberals. Seems pretty easy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 04, 2021, 08:01:33 AM
Debating starting a side hustle writing fanfic for liberals. Seems pretty easy.
Dibs on the story arc of them starting an only fans and scissoring on top of the receipts for the shares they got in the divorce.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 04, 2021, 08:02:59 AM
Dibs on the story arc of them starting an only fans and scissoring on top of the receipts for the shares they got in the divorce.
I was gonna have them team up with Beyonce and Michelle Obama to investigate increasingly obscure Russiagate figures...

...culminating in scissoring
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 04, 2021, 08:20:42 AM
No Pelosi, no horny
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 04, 2021, 09:25:07 AM
Also RBG's ghost is watching them
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 05, 2021, 05:56:13 PM
When the peasants aren't showing up to work at Arby's:

https://money.yahoo.com/montana-plans-to-cancel-unemployment-benefits-161755830.html

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 05, 2021, 07:29:12 PM
When the peasants aren't showing up to work at Arby's:

https://money.yahoo.com/montana-plans-to-cancel-unemployment-benefits-161755830.html



$10/hour

No benefits

"nO oNe WaNtS tO wOrK aNymOrE!!!"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on May 05, 2021, 08:38:58 PM
(https://i.redd.it/ykgb101oebx61.png)

Charlie's got a real good understanding of how our legal system works. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 05, 2021, 08:43:31 PM
(https://i.redd.it/ykgb101oebx61.png)

Charlie's got a real good understanding of how our legal system works.

“Today’s digital platforms provide avenues for historically unprecedented amounts of speech, including speech by government actors. Also unprecedented, however, is control of so much speech in the hands of a few private parties,” Thomas wrote. “We will soon have no choice but to address how our legal doctrines apply to highly concentrated, privately owned information infrastructure such as digital platforms.”

Straight from a sitting Supreme Court Justice, and in this case Clarence is 110 percent correct.

How Facebook actually gets away with the selective enforcement that is their TOS when its effectively denying people a place in their marketplace based on ideology is something that I have a feeling gets attacked first.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 05, 2021, 09:09:33 PM
"Nationalize Facebook"
-Clarence Thomas, probably
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 05, 2021, 09:17:02 PM
"Nationalize Facebook"
-Clarence Thomas, probably

Didn't Thomas already rule that private enterprises are allowed to determine which people are and aren't allowed to use their services based upon their personal moral codes, or is that only when it comes to rooster lovers who like dessert?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 06, 2021, 06:55:26 AM
Buckle up buckaroos, we're flying to Arizona

https://twitter.com/TheeAlexLawson/status/1390271506014420995?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 06, 2021, 11:54:47 AM
https://twitter.com/NewYorkStateAG/status/1390298451435458561?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 07, 2021, 09:19:06 AM
Back to the pokey dopey

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/06/nyregion/sheldon-silver-prison-release.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 07, 2021, 09:28:45 AM
Back to the pokey dopey

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/06/nyregion/sheldon-silver-prison-release.html
They should have sentenced him to build the West Side Stadium
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 07, 2021, 09:56:34 AM
Time to immiserate the poors so they can be yelled at through the drive thru window

https://twitter.com/schwartzbCNBC/status/1390672700998393859?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 09, 2021, 08:27:12 AM
They should have sentenced him to build the West Side Stadium

Yup.  James Dolan-$->ShadySilver
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 11, 2021, 05:12:33 PM
Good thing Texas fixed all their problems, now it's just this and trying to erase trans people left to check off the list

https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1392119075061604360?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 12, 2021, 12:22:19 AM
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/more-100-republican-former-officials-others-seek-reforms-threaten-new-n1267053
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 12, 2021, 05:54:21 AM
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/more-100-republican-former-officials-others-seek-reforms-threaten-new-n1267053
They won't do excrement.  Either they will chicken out or it'll end up being a couple of them that do it and no one will care.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 12, 2021, 09:54:01 AM
They won't do excrement.  Either they will chicken out or it'll end up being a couple of them that do it and no one will care.
It's political suicide should they not.  Certainly in the long game it's in the party's best interests to move on from Trump (inevitable listener's fatigue) and what they could use is a cynosure of sorts outside of crusty 'old establishment' Chaney.  Question is would they have the stones to put Tim Scott front and center? 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 12, 2021, 10:06:07 AM


It's political suicide should they not.  Certainly in the long game it's in the party's best interests to move on from Trump (inevitable listener's fatigue) and what they could use is a cynosure of sorts outside of crusty 'old establishment' Chaney.  Question is would they have the stones to put Tim Scott front and center?

Tim Scott is the next guy they'll all claim they loved despite only getting 3% of the primary vote
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 12, 2021, 08:58:06 PM
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/more-100-republican-former-officials-others-seek-reforms-threaten-new-n1267053

Lol @ the failed Republicans that the media will now laud as heroes after previously spending years shitting on them both in order to distract from the absolute mess that is the current administration and continue their own bullshit spin cycle.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 12, 2021, 10:52:20 PM
Lol @ the failed Republicans that the media will now laud as heroes after previously spending years shitting on them both in order to distract from the absolute mess that is the current administration and continue their own bullshit spin cycle.
Liz Cheney has net positive favorability with Dems and Biden voters right now. I hate this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 12, 2021, 11:08:05 PM
Liz Cheney has net positive favorability with Dems and Biden voters right now. I hate this.

Liz Cheney also voted along Trump lines more often than Gaetz which a lot of Dems seem to be completely forgetting.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 13, 2021, 07:39:16 AM
Liz Cheney has net positive favorability with Dems and Biden voters right now. I hate this.

LOL embrace the hawks.

Liz Cheney also voted along Trump lines more often than Gaetz which a lot of Dems seem to be completely forgetting.

Conservatives are doing the same re: Stefanik and her shall I say (at least from my POV), less than stellar voting record.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 13, 2021, 02:13:55 PM
re: Stefanik and her shall I say (at least from my POV), less than stellar voting record.

żtu problema? ˇAbre ya las compuertas!   : )
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 13, 2021, 03:09:36 PM
żtu problema? ˇAbre ya las compuertas!   : )

Lol, fair enough but I can't impress upon anyone willing to listen how much Liz Cheney sucks and represents an old guard that modern conservatism needs to do a 4.2 40 away from.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 14, 2021, 08:26:09 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/05/14/us/politics/joel-greenberg-matt-gaetz.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 15, 2021, 09:44:49 AM
https://www.newsweek.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-allegedly-violated-georgia-tax-law-claiming-two-permanent-residences-1591787 (https://www.newsweek.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-allegedly-violated-georgia-tax-law-claiming-two-permanent-residences-1591787)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 15, 2021, 10:18:52 AM
https://www.newsweek.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-allegedly-violated-georgia-tax-law-claiming-two-permanent-residences-1591787 (https://www.newsweek.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-allegedly-violated-georgia-tax-law-claiming-two-permanent-residences-1591787)

Nothing will come of it.  Same with Trump and Gaetz with his coke whores.  And Cuomo.  Too much drama for anyone to follow through.  Trump will die first and then they will grow balls after that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 19, 2021, 04:14:57 PM
https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1394667571031547912?s=20
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 19, 2021, 04:22:10 PM
"Let my retards go"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 19, 2021, 09:06:30 PM
https://twitter.com/balleralert/status/1395182655663087622?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 20, 2021, 09:09:19 AM
https://twitter.com/balleralert/status/1395182655663087622?s=21
"Get off my lawn!"  : )


Them & us and us & them:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KKTC7Vtg2oU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=muTegzVhooc
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 20, 2021, 10:31:56 AM
As much as I'm offended by Lori Lightfoot's blatant racism, I genuinely would place less of an onus or emphasis on it if she actually did her job and didn't preside over a rat infested pooper that hails bullets.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 20, 2021, 11:25:36 AM
As much as I'm offended by Lori Lightfoot's blatant racism, I genuinely would place less of an onus or emphasis on it if she actually did her job and didn't preside over a rat infested pooper that hails bullets.

'Hey whitey  here come the spades!'    ; )

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XCViNDamB1E
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 24, 2021, 08:35:26 PM
https://twitter.com/colinkalmbacher/status/1396868514414202885?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 25, 2021, 11:28:16 AM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1397150992341377027?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 25, 2021, 12:19:19 PM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1397150992341377027?s=21

As stupid as the comparison is, the idea that twitter leftists are going to call it anti-semetic after five years of calling anyone and everyone who disagrees with their shitty little worldview a NaZi is the height of stupidity.

Oh wait, I forgot, I can't talk about issues in a broader context, thats whataboutism.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 26, 2021, 09:36:03 AM
Marco Rubio trying to cancel teaching history

https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1397556104863887362?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 26, 2021, 12:08:30 PM
Marco Rubio trying to cancel teaching history

https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1397556104863887362?s=19

It's your contention that the 1619 Project as the most high profile example is accurate history?

Literally every historian who's studied it would disagree.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 26, 2021, 02:04:07 PM


It's your contention

No
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 27, 2021, 11:03:17 AM
Not going to pass under Wolf but yikes

https://twitter.com/ValArkooshPA/status/1397267608236265473?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 27, 2021, 01:03:22 PM
If there's one thing we can all agree on, it's that no one gives a flying freak what Paul Ryan thinks.

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1397900422258561024?s=19

(https://pyxis.nymag.com/v1/imgs/1e2/658/97214dcde5465d5180e2ff718c8b30060e-1----.rsocial.w1200.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 27, 2021, 02:01:42 PM
Not going to pass under Wolf but yikes

https://twitter.com/ValArkooshPA/status/1397267608236265473?s=19

This is freaking terrible.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 27, 2021, 02:19:15 PM
If there's one thing we can all agree on, it's that no one gives a flying freak what Paul Ryan thinks.

https://twitter.com/CNN/status/1397900422258561024?s=19

(https://pyxis.nymag.com/v1/imgs/1e2/658/97214dcde5465d5180e2ff718c8b30060e-1----.rsocial.w1200.jpg)

LOL, freak THIS GUY.


Not going to pass under Wolf but yikes

https://twitter.com/ValArkooshPA/status/1397267608236265473?s=19

JFC...the media is already desperate to fill their bylines with anything besides reporting on the current disaster that is this administration, why are these idiotic state legislatures in Texas and PA just falling over themselves to give them fodder.

Simple advice; if your opposition wants to cull their own population-let them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on May 28, 2021, 05:40:39 AM
This is fun.  Watch the video

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/05/heritage-foundation-dark-money-voter-suppression-laws/?utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=naytev&utm_medium=social
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 28, 2021, 07:34:06 AM
This is fun.  Watch the video

https://www.motherjones.com/politics/2021/05/heritage-foundation-dark-money-voter-suppression-laws/?utm_source=twitter&utm_campaign=naytev&utm_medium=social

MUH VOTER SUPPRESSION.

Please.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 28, 2021, 08:18:43 AM
Yeah it's totally not about reducing the votes for their opponents in order to protect their shrinking base's ability to keep them in power. Definitely not.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 28, 2021, 08:23:59 AM
From a purely political (not ethical) standpoint, I understand why some of these Republicans are tolerating all the crazies from the Trump side.  The Republican party is in sort of a nuclear war-type standoff, where mutually-assured destruction is the only thing keeping them together.  Both traditional conservatives and the far right crazies know that without each other they both go down to the Democrats.  Either side officially breaking off from the other would end in both being wiped off the map in most elections.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 28, 2021, 09:10:11 AM
Yeah it's totally not about reducing the votes for their opponents in order to protect their shrinking base's ability to keep them in power. Definitely not.

Sorry that in a two party system one party isn't just going to bend over and make it as easy as possible for the other to ballot harvest, falsely register, illegally assist, buy votes/duplicate votes or utilize an underbelly of people so disaffected they can't even verify who they are via a simple ID.

From a purely political (not ethical) standpoint, I understand why some of these Republicans are tolerating all the crazies from the Trump side.  The Republican party is in sort of a nuclear war-type standoff, where mutually-assured destruction is the only thing keeping them together.  Both traditional conservatives and the far right crazies know that without each other they both go down to the Democrats.  Either side officially breaking off from the other would end in both being wiped off the map in most elections.

LOL
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 28, 2021, 01:23:08 PM
The majority of one party voted down an attempt to investigate terrorists who sought to execute their coworkers.

At what point will the Democrats stop negotiating with terrorists and those who align themselves with them?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 28, 2021, 01:37:00 PM
The majority of one party voted down an attempt to investigate terrorists who sought to execute their coworkers.

At what point will the Democrats stop negotiating with terrorists and those who align themselves with them?

Ahahahahahahahahahaha.

Seriously, there's nothing else to do but laugh at this hyperbolic nonsense.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 28, 2021, 02:00:04 PM
End the filibuster.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 28, 2021, 02:04:16 PM
The majority of one party voted down an attempt to investigate terrorists who sought to execute their coworkers.

At what point will the Democrats stop negotiating with terrorists and those who align themselves with them?

The Republican party is more concerned with power than it is in preserving a democracy or even living in an objective reality.

I seriously hope this causes Manchin to rethink his stance.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 28, 2021, 05:01:45 PM
The Republican party is more concerned with power than it is in preserving a democracy or even living in an objective reality.

I seriously hope this causes Manchin to rethink his stance.
It's almost admirable, if only Democrats were as interested in gaining and properly using power.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 28, 2021, 06:03:59 PM
It's almost admirable

No.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 28, 2021, 06:07:31 PM
No.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210528/21fa034d3cd154c7376c6a584c1960d5.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 28, 2021, 07:32:55 PM
End the filibuster.

The Republican party is more concerned with power than it is in preserving a democracy or even living in an objective reality.

I seriously hope this causes Manchin to rethink his stance.

Juxtaposing these two comments against each other is just too freaking funny.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on May 28, 2021, 08:16:13 PM
It's almost admirable, if only Democrats were as interested in gaining and properly using power.


No.

I respect it.  Republicans get excrement done.  I certainly don't like almost all of the excrement they get done but I respect that they play the game to win.  Democrats focus-group the most palatable ways to lose. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 28, 2021, 08:46:26 PM
I respect it.  Republicans get excrement done.  I certainly don't like almost all of the excrement they get done but I respect that they play the game to win.  Democrats focus-group the most palatable ways to lose. 

Respect is not the word I use.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 28, 2021, 09:06:04 PM
I respect it.  Republicans get excrement done.  I certainly don't like almost all of the excrement they get done but I respect that they play the game to win.  Democrats focus-group the most palatable ways to lose.

...what are you talking about?

They had a majority in 2016 in every branch of Congress, and had control of the executive branch and couldn't even get NPR defunded.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on May 28, 2021, 09:44:32 PM
Respect is not the word I use.

Yeah, I feel ya.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on May 31, 2021, 01:15:36 PM
End the filibuster.

The only argument against it is that Dems plan to use it when they inevitably lose power...

It's almost admirable, if only Democrats were as interested in gaining and properly using power.

...because of this.

The Republican party is more concerned with power than it is in preserving a democracy or even living in an objective reality.

I seriously hope this causes Manchin to rethink his stance.

It won't. Because he's a Republican wearing a blue mask.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 31, 2021, 09:02:53 PM
It won't. Because he's a Republican wearing a blue mask.

He's already said that he hasn't changed his opinion so he can take his disappointment speech and freak himself with the printed transcript.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 04, 2021, 06:57:03 PM
This guy is one of the worst people on the internet but I find this particular schtick hilarious

https://twitter.com/mattwalshblog/status/1400856462155517952?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 04, 2021, 07:35:45 PM
This guy is one of the worst people on the internet but I find this particular schtick hilarious

https://twitter.com/mattwalshblog/status/1400856462155517952?s=21

Lol, Matt Walsh sucks, but that's really hyperbolic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on June 04, 2021, 11:34:13 PM
(https://i.ibb.co/nBVw5gq/9mkgzely15371.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 06, 2021, 09:30:59 PM
https://twitter.com/RepMoBrooks/status/1401627240123846657?s=19

https://twitter.com/RAH_NYC/status/1401636168823885825?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 06, 2021, 09:50:32 PM
https://twitter.com/RepMoBrooks/status/1401627240123846657?s=19

https://twitter.com/RAH_NYC/status/1401636168823885825?s=19

This country seriously needs an amendment or law or something mandating that public elected officials be between the ages of 30 and 60

I know everyone on the left and right point fingers

But freaking old people are the biggest problems
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 06, 2021, 09:51:35 PM
Wonder if someone got in his email and changed the password.so he can't get in.  That would be awesome.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 07, 2021, 09:11:37 AM
Does NJ have a single pol who isn't awful?

https://twitter.com/ddayen/status/1401891386316640256?s=19

Sidenote, JE sees no problem with this, the borrowers can simply just say no
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 07, 2021, 09:25:28 AM
Does NJ have a single pol who isn't awful?

https://twitter.com/ddayen/status/1401891386316640256?s=19

Sidenote, JE sees no problem with this, the borrowers can simply just say no

Either you are really, really bad at drawing appropriate parallels, or you think that everyone else is too stupid to understand your false equivalencies. Either way you should stop trying to do it.

FWIW, I think that payday loans are hideous predatory garbage, but they're also a symptom of a much bigger problem.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 07, 2021, 09:53:01 AM
Either you are really, really bad at drawing appropriate parallels, or you think that everyone else is too stupid to understand your false equivalencies. Either way you should stop trying to do it.

FWIW, I think that payday loans are hideous predatory garbage, but they're also a symptom of a much bigger problem.

Pay day loans are a necessary evil in fairly litigating a clients personal injury claim against an insurance company.

I'm certainly not saying there isn't something that can be done via cutting down interest rates, but if you want to make sure insurance companies can get away with lowballing people who are injured and therefore out of work, abolishing them completely is a great way to go.

If one is using said loan for any other reason then the one stated above, they must LOVE getting juiced at a rate that would make shylocks or Fannie Mae (pretty much one in the same) blush. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 07, 2021, 09:59:18 AM
Pay day loans are a necessary evil in fairly litigating a clients personal injury claim against an insurance company.

I'm certainly not saying there isn't something that can be done via cutting down interest rates, but if you want to make sure insurance companies can get away with lowballing people who are injured and therefore out of work, abolishing them completely is a great way to go.

If one is using said loan for any other reason then the one stated above, they must LOVE getting juiced at a rate that would make shylocks or Fannie Mae (pretty much one in the same) blush. 

Or they're not consistently making enough money to cover the bare necessities of life despite working full time hours and often more than one job, and have no alternative but to get themselves into a vicious spiral of predatory debt.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 07, 2021, 09:58:02 PM
Either you are really, really bad at drawing appropriate parallels, or you think that everyone else is too stupid to understand your false equivalencies. Either way you should stop trying to do it.

FWIW, I think that payday loans are hideous predatory garbage, but they're also a symptom of a much bigger problem.

Yes people being freaking idiots is a much bigger problem than predatory garbage payday loans
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 07, 2021, 09:59:40 PM
Or they're not consistently making enough money to cover the bare necessities of life despite working full time hours and often more than one job, and have no alternative but to get themselves into a vicious spiral of predatory debt.

Or they're financially impotent, and shouldn't have access to any credit for their own good. Of course to deny stupid people credit then they'd just be shouted down as racist


If we're talking payday loans in extreme circumstances (ie a illness catastrophic injury etc) then it's understandable.

But id wager at least 95% of payday loans are a symptom of someone being a full blown freaking idiot.

People would literally have more disposable income if they made sacrafice and smart decisions for a short period, and stopped taking out these stupid loans sapping their money
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 07, 2021, 10:01:08 PM
Or they're financially impotent, and shouldn't have access to any credit for their own good. Of course to deny stupid people credit then they'd just be shouted down as racist

Which do you think is more likely?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 07, 2021, 10:05:25 PM
Which do you think is more likely?

100% what I said.

All the data on American finances  credit and borrowing supports it.

I get it that people are stuck in a hole. But you don't get out of a hole by keep digging down.

I'm not talking about people suddenly making changes where they can buy a car and contribute to a 401k

I'm talking about literally taking loans out against your own freaking pay. There's legit reasons for it, the vast majority of the time it's just stupid people being stupid
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 07, 2021, 10:10:17 PM
Also only 7.8% of Americans work more than 1 job according to the US department of commerce via data from the the United States Census

So all the bullshit people are spewing from politicians about how many Americans are working more than one job to make ends meet is absolute freaking garbage
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 08, 2021, 12:39:37 PM
I work 2 jobs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 08, 2021, 12:40:59 PM
I work 2 jobs.
Does giving BJs count as a job?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 08, 2021, 01:02:04 PM
Does giving BJs count as a job?

https://www.spreadshirt.com/shop/design/blowjobs+are+real+jobs+womens+cropped+t-shirt-D5ef8f2cdf9376460b7584688?sellable=XyDg4yzpb0S87Qjv19oN-1408-8 (https://www.spreadshirt.com/shop/design/blowjobs+are+real+jobs+womens+cropped+t-shirt-D5ef8f2cdf9376460b7584688?sellable=XyDg4yzpb0S87Qjv19oN-1408-8)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 08, 2021, 02:02:07 PM
Does NJ have a single pol who isn't awful?
Bob Menendez even on his best day couldn't achieve awful.


I work 2 jobs.
Does giving BJs count as a job?
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c6/Banksia_Serrata_seedpod.jpg/320px-Banksia_Serrata_seedpod.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Miamipuck on June 08, 2021, 02:07:20 PM
Does giving BJs count as a job?

Yawn
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on June 08, 2021, 06:29:27 PM
Yawn
That's a yes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 08, 2021, 07:33:58 PM
Also only 7.8% of Americans work more than 1 job according to the US department of commerce via data from the the United States Census

So all the bullshit people are spewing from politicians about how many Americans are working more than one job to make ends meet is absolute freaking garbage
People working 2 jobs were too busy to answer the census (or vote in the primary)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 08, 2021, 11:38:26 PM
https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1402218237048279041

This clip makes me proud to be on Long Island
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 09, 2021, 07:58:23 AM
https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1402218237048279041

This clip makes me proud to be on Long Island
Not to defend Mara Gay but it was taken wildly out of context for obvious reasons.

There's a legitimate retort to what she actually said, which is that nobody is stopping non-Trump supporters from flying a US flag.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 09, 2021, 08:30:06 AM
Not to defend Mara Gay but it was taken wildly out of context for obvious reasons.

There's a legitimate retort to what she actually said, which is that nobody is stopping non-Trump supporters from flying a US flag.

Without getting into the absurdity of complaining about "expletives towards Joe Biden" as if some variation of "freak Trump" wasn't a popular shirt/bumper sticker, she openly talks about marginalizing half the country while trying to establish some sort of victimhood as if she didn't spend the weekend "on Long Island" in the uber-exclusive Hampton area, or isn't continually afforded unwarranted privilege thanks to her position.

It wasn't taken out of context. She made a dumb attempt at a dumb point because that's usually what happened when people continually look to stoke racial flames and tension.

I find absolutely no validity to the incredibly divisive motives she assigned towards people when they fly the flag, and think it's absurd it went unchallenged. It's a constant thinking of the worst of people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 09, 2021, 09:10:33 AM
Without getting into the absurdity of complaining about "expletives towards Joe Biden" as if some variation of "freak Trump" wasn't a popular shirt/bumper sticker, she openly talks about marginalizing half the country while trying to establish some sort of victimhood as if she didn't spend the weekend "on Long Island" in the uber-exclusive Hampton area, or isn't continually afforded unwarranted privilege thanks to her position.

It wasn't taken out of context. She made a dumb attempt at a dumb point because that's usually what happened when people continually look to stoke racial flames and tension.

I find absolutely no validity to the incredibly divisive motives she assigned towards people when they fly the flag, and think it's absurd it went unchallenged. It's a constant thinking of the worst of people.
I don't care about the other stuff, but she's not wrong to observe Trump supporters presenting themselves as "real" Americans and othering everyone else. It's a common theme among Republicans at large, it just happens to currently be channeled through Trump. Flying the US flag and a Trump flag together does imply that message. And by pretending she's offended by the mere sight of the flag just supports that observation.

Now is it a meaningful complaint for her to make? Meh, it seems pretty shallow and surface level and not really my thing. It's just not technically wrong, I just don't think it's useful for endearing anyone to her point of view and has only provided fodder to make it worse.

And yes, liberals and leftists engage in othering too. Just the who and why varies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 09, 2021, 10:31:55 AM
I get her whole BillyBobTrump 'muh flag' thing even if I don't exactly equate L.I. as a redneck bastion.  At the same time, beyond the Old Glory/Trump banner-in-tandem look, freak her for arbitrarily extending her "I see redneck monsters everywhere!!" paranoia to include folks sporting 'the flag' by itself in general let alone around Memorial Day in particular.  Don't judge a flag by its cover.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 09, 2021, 02:23:05 PM
I don't care about the other stuff, but she's not wrong to observe Trump supporters presenting themselves as "real" Americans and othering everyone else. It's a common theme among Republicans at large, it just happens to currently be channeled through Trump. Flying the US flag and a Trump flag together does imply that message. And by pretending she's offended by the mere sight of the flag just supports that observation.

Not that I'm the grand arbiter of fairness, but this is absolutely a fair point, and one worthy of discussion/commentary/debate if you're ostensibly a journalist.

I get her whole BillyBobTrump 'muh flag' thing even if I don't exactly equate L.I. as a redneck bastion.  At the same time, beyond the Old Glory/Trump banner-in-tandem look, freak her for arbitrarily extending her "I see redneck monsters everywhere!!" paranoia to include folks sporting 'the flag' by itself in general let alone around Memorial Day in particular.  Don't judge a flag by its cover.

And this instead is how her commentary came off.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 09, 2021, 02:50:20 PM
https://twitter.com/Forbes/status/1402388019420741633?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 09, 2021, 04:54:51 PM
Someone (not you, mj) tell me if this is good news:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/08/nyregion/nj-primary-election-results.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 09, 2021, 05:02:12 PM
Someone (not you, mj) tell me if this is good news:

https://www.nytimes.com/2021/06/08/nyregion/nj-primary-election-results.html

LOL, love that. Sorry my friend, can't help myself.

On a personal level I've met Jack a number of times. Good guy. Not my choice by any stretch given his voting record in the assembly, but I understand the logic in deep blue NJ of running the very definition of a moderate/centrist candidate. 

The idea that this was some rebuke of Trump is hilarious though when you consider the following;

Had Rizzo and Singh (and to clarify, Singh is a TOTAL SCUMBAG) not split the vote along the lines of running on bringing a more pro-Trump posture into the race, one of them might have won.

I'm glad the NYT (grosssss) in their infinite wisdom has decided to set Jack apart from Trump considering the Murphy campaign is already trying to say Jack is nothing more than a Trump sycophant.

Phil Murphy is a demonstrative disaster who I have no doubt will skate to re-election. The NJGOP could freak up a cup of coffee.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 10, 2021, 01:03:14 PM
https://www.businessinsider.com/global-confidence-in-biden-is-58-points-higher-than-trump-in-12-countries-2021-6

It seems clear that this is because the rest of the world is delighted about being able to go back to taking advantage of and picking on the USA now that its global protector is no longer around to prevent them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 10, 2021, 04:12:28 PM
Shoehorning this in here

https://twitter.com/The_Law_Boy/status/1403088105847021578?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 10, 2021, 04:32:16 PM
Shoehorning this in here

https://twitter.com/The_Law_Boy/status/1403088105847021578?s=19

Why....
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 10, 2021, 04:50:51 PM
https://www.businessinsider.com/global-confidence-in-biden-is-58-points-higher-than-trump-in-12-countries-2021-6

It seems clear that this is because the rest of the world is delighted about being able to go back to taking advantage of and picking on the USA now that its global protector is no longer around to prevent them.

France Germany and Canada highlight the list

Say no more
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 11, 2021, 03:15:37 PM
Happy Friday

https://twitter.com/Newsweek/status/1402846933371310081?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 11, 2021, 03:37:07 PM
Happy Friday

https://twitter.com/Newsweek/status/1402846933371310081?s=19
This world is passing me by quickly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 11, 2021, 03:43:10 PM
This world is passing me by quickly.
All you need to know is that one day your sons will Menendez you because their teacher told them slavery was bad or something.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 15, 2021, 01:39:06 PM
https://twitter.com/cnn/status/1404049929505497095?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 15, 2021, 04:24:23 PM
Pipehitter SZN

https://twitter.com/mikepompeo/status/1404836432368312324?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 15, 2021, 04:35:51 PM
https://twitter.com/cnn/status/1404049929505497095?s=21

Odd how the rich pay little to no taxes, yet the top 10% pays almost all net income tax in the United States

Quote
For the 2018 tax year, the last year for which we have data, the top 1 percent paid over 40 percent of federal income taxes, despite earning just under 21 percent of total adjusted gross income (AGI). The bottom 50 percent of taxpayers earned 11.6 percent of total AGI, but paid less than 3 percent of income taxes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 15, 2021, 05:06:58 PM
Odd how the rich pay little to no taxes, yet the top 10% pays almost all net income tax in the United States


40% = Almost All

edit: nm i see it now
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 16, 2021, 11:22:40 AM
Hillary endorsing in a random Ohio congressional race to spite Bernie surrogate Nina Turner

https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/1405193935526506499?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 16, 2021, 11:26:59 AM
China is stealing are jeans!

(https://i.imgur.com/yFULbnl.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 16, 2021, 12:34:38 PM
China is stealing are jeans!

(https://i.imgur.com/yFULbnl.jpg)

“Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face?”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 16, 2021, 12:35:55 PM
China is stealing are jeans!

(https://i.imgur.com/yFULbnl.jpg)

Uh... the Olympics are in Japan.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 16, 2021, 12:36:34 PM
“Do you realize that fluoridation is the most monstrously conceived and dangerous communist plot we have ever had to face?”
I can no longer sit back and allow communist infiltration, communist indoctrination, communist subversion, and the international communist conspiracy to sap and impurify all of our precious bodily fluids.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 16, 2021, 12:36:57 PM
Uh... the Olympics are in Japan.
Tom Cotton: "yeah, that's what I said"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 16, 2021, 01:11:25 PM
Uh... the Olympics are in Japan.

https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1404906456684580867?s=19 (https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1404906456684580867?s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 16, 2021, 01:15:32 PM
https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1404906456684580867?s=19 (https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1404906456684580867?s=19)

Wait until he finds out that the best figure skater in the US is a second generation Chinese-American called Nathan Wei Chen.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 17, 2021, 05:36:17 PM
Glad to see Warnock come out today and say he's not opposed to voter ID laws, (even though that's untrue based on past rhetoric), GET IT DONE RAFFY!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 22, 2021, 07:46:50 AM
LOL and now that fat lying gaptoothed mess in Georgia said the same thing!

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2021/06/21/democrats-voter-id/

What a pathetic job by WaPo by the way, but remember Republicans either flip flop or act out of hypocrisy, Democrats "evolve."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 22, 2021, 08:01:08 AM
Your boy Kavanaugh is teabagging the NCAA
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 22, 2021, 08:33:40 AM
Your boy Kavanaugh is teabagging the NCAA

Beautiful example of judicial bipartisanship in these divided times. Kavanaugh's concurrence really did eviscerate them in a well written manner.

FWIW and for the record, freak THE NCAA. I'd have more sympathy if they didn't spend years doing everything they could  to not only drastically hoard equity for themselves, but not even allowing these kids to pursue alternative avenues such as autograph signings to make money off their own likeness. As Joaquin's Joker said, you get what you fuckin deserve.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 22, 2021, 08:54:27 AM
Quote from: mj2sexay
LOL and now that fat, gap-tooth mess in Georgia said the same thing
Like to see you call this gap-tooth dude on his diastema

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/89/Michael_Strahan_Bagram_AF_Base.jpg/640px-Michael_Strahan_Bagram_AF_Base.jpg)



Quote from: badger
Your boy Kavanaugh is tea bagging the NCAA
Fwiw on MSNBC this morning, Morning Joe opened up with a Trump-trolling montage (accompanied by a Mika-led group guffaw) followed by Scarborough & Co. hailing Kavanaugh's pro-student-athlete-$ opinion. 

As for the Abrams/Wapo I.D. issue, it appears that polls indicate the vast majority of those surveyed actually favoring voter I.D. in spite of, e.g., the ACLU: https://www.aclu.org/other/oppose-voter-id-legislation-fact-sheet
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 22, 2021, 09:09:28 AM

FWIW and for the record, freak THE NCAA.
Yup

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2013/2/18/4001350/ncaa-miami-football-investigation-julie-roe-lach
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 22, 2021, 09:32:04 AM
Like to see you call this gap-tooth dude on his diastema

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/89/Michael_Strahan_Bagram_AF_Base.jpg/640px-Michael_Strahan_Bagram_AF_Base.jpg)

Now why would I do that? I actually like Strahan (despite his absurd attempts to portray the NCAA athletes who were invited to the White House during the shutdown as victims because they were served fast food). To my recollection he never cast illegitimacy over an election before absurdly a year later criticizing another public figure for doing the exact same thing.

Actually, there was a girl in college who was known as "Strahan" due to having diastema, she also was legendary (and I think this speaks to the lousiness of who she was with) for smoking a cigarette while midway through engaging in sexual congress.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 22, 2021, 10:31:45 AM
Actually, there was a girl in college who was known as "Strahan" due to having diastema, she also was legendary (and I think this speaks to the lousiness of who she was with) for smoking a cigarette while midway through engaging in sexual congress.

If she were known as 'Lauren Hutton' then I'd be impressed.  Btw, what community college was this at?  : )
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 22, 2021, 10:44:25 AM
If she were known as 'Lauren Hutton' then I'd be impressed.  Btw, what community college was this at?  : )

 ;D ;D ;D ;D

I have no idea how or why Seton Hall University has a positive reputation (aside from Stillman School of Business, and the school of diplomacy and international relations), but so it goes!

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 22, 2021, 01:25:03 PM

The Hall got royally screwed vs. Michigan (Rumeal Robinson)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 22, 2021, 01:43:18 PM
Fweedom

https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein/status/1407402033896902661?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 22, 2021, 02:50:55 PM
Everyone I don't like is critical race theory

“I’m concerned that Ms. Ahuja is a disciple of radical critical theorists,” Sen. Josh Hawley (R-Mo.) said Tuesday from the Senate floor.

https://federalnewsnetwork.com/people/2021/06/senate-confirms-ahuja-as-first-permanent-opm-director-in-more-than-a-year/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 22, 2021, 02:56:33 PM
Out of curiosity, as an Italian am I white enough to join Sheldon White(lol)house's beach club?

And since CRT was brought up again;

https://www.washingtonpost.com/video/the-lily/what-is-white-racial-identity-and-why-is-it-important/2021/06/18/a7db496c-02a7-4128-9f4e-0f924df83976_video.html-2

what the freak is this garbage.

As for the specific nominee, considering she's directly lauded noted neo-racist/segregationist Ibram Kendi, Hawley isn't that far off.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 22, 2021, 04:32:59 PM
Out of curiosity, as an Italian am I white enough to join Sheldon White(lol)house's beach club?

I've no problem faccia bella    ; )

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/02016_Mädchen_mit_den_Schnurrbärten.jpg/320px-02016_Mädchen_mit_den_Schnurrbärten.jpg)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 22, 2021, 06:07:03 PM
Filibuster gotta get got.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 22, 2021, 06:08:19 PM
Filibuster gotta get got.

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 23, 2021, 06:17:45 AM
Dumbass SZN

https://twitter.com/evelynpix/status/1407529403169509379?s=19

MUH GRANDADDY WASN'T NO MONKEY
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 23, 2021, 06:47:08 AM
Dumbass SZN

https://twitter.com/evelynpix/status/1407529403169509379?s=19

MUH GRANDADDY WASN'T NO MONKEY
https://twitter.com/REFrankel/status/1407536194326519808?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 23, 2021, 07:41:25 AM
Ah I see the strawmen and absolute mischaracterization/flat out lies on what opponents of CRT are fighting against continues.

That must be why WaPo had to issue about six different "corrections" on their Christopher Rufo hitpiece.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voddie_Baucham

I'm sure that's what Baucham is arguing against, he wants it taught in schools that white people are racially superior (lol).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 23, 2021, 07:47:52 AM
I'm just making fun of a fat guy getting arrested for being an poopchute.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 23, 2021, 07:52:26 AM
This right here is the heart of the problem:

(https://i.imgur.com/Mb2E2GY.png)

Everyone talking (and yelling), and no one listening. The belief that stopping your gums flapping for just one minute would be defeat. The absolute refusal to even attempt to understand, merely to dominate the conversation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 23, 2021, 08:22:48 AM
Ah I see the strawmen and absolute mischaracterization/flat out lies on what opponents of CRT are fighting against continues.

That must be why WaPo had to issue about six different "corrections" on their Christopher Rufo hitpiece.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Voddie_Baucham

I'm sure that's what Baucham is arguing against, he wants it taught in schools that white people are racially superior (lol).
For the most part opponents of CRT are just getting angry at something they made up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 23, 2021, 11:24:48 AM
This right here is the heart of the problem:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/Krispy_Kreme_Doughnuts.jpg/320px-Krispy_Kreme_Doughnuts.jpg)
(https://i.imgur.com/Mb2E2GY.png)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 23, 2021, 12:01:41 PM
I just find it amusing that people seem to think critical race theory is k-12 grade material.

Ignoring the political aspects of it.

A huge percent of these high school graduates don't know basic math or English. Heck they can't even get reasonable percentages to graduate on time, especially in highly urban areas.

At the end of the day a far bigger problem than CRT (which the right is using as base rallying bullshit just like the left is still jerking off January 6th) is that public schools are freaking terrible
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 23, 2021, 06:39:36 PM
I just find it amusing that people seem to think critical race theory is k-12 grade material.

Ignoring the political aspects of it.

A huge percent of these high school graduates don't know basic math or English. Heck they can't even get reasonable percentages to graduate on time, especially in highly urban areas.

At the end of the day a far bigger problem than CRT (which the right is using as base rallying bullshit just like the left is still jerking off January 6th) is that public schools are freaking terrible


Why say absolutely nothing of substance in 0 words when you can say it in 71?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: d sw0rdz on June 23, 2021, 08:58:59 PM
Why say absolutely nothing of substance in 0 words when you can say it in 71?

lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 23, 2021, 09:06:01 PM
CRT (which the right is using as base rallying bullshit just like the left is still jerking off January 6th)

This was substantial despite everything before and after it

Edit: incorrect use of left though
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 23, 2021, 09:30:40 PM
This was substantial despite everything before and after it

Edit: incorrect use of left though

Elaborate on how the latter half is substantial.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 23, 2021, 09:54:48 PM
Elaborate on how the latter half is substantial.
They're 9/11ing it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 24, 2021, 08:03:29 AM
I just find it amusing that people seem to think critical race theory is k-12 grade material.

Ignoring the political aspects of it.

A huge percent of these high school graduates don't know basic math or English. Heck they can't even get reasonable percentages to graduate on time, especially in highly urban areas.

At the end of the day a far bigger problem than CRT (which the right is using as base rallying bullshit just like the left is still jerking off January 6th) is that public schools are freaking terrible

Lol, let this be a lesson that you can play "enlightened centrist" and it's never going to be good enough.

And again, the idea that its just the right rallying against this is unequivocally false.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 24, 2021, 10:34:51 AM
They're 9/11ing it

It's kind of a big deal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 24, 2021, 11:00:56 AM
This is exactly like 1984

https://twitter.com/JanNWolfe/status/1408082889284096008?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 24, 2021, 11:01:24 AM
It's kind of a big deal.
I honestly don't think it's a top 10 priority for the country.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 24, 2021, 02:05:16 PM
I honestly don't think it's a top 10 priority for the country.

I think differently.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 24, 2021, 02:21:16 PM
I think differently.

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 24, 2021, 02:30:39 PM
I think differently.
The ongoing pandemic
Climate change
Ending material support for states committing war crimes/apartheid
Healthcare in general
Homelessness
Income/wealth inequality
Voting rights
Labor rights/minimum wage
Crippling personal debts
Explaining to Earl from Goochland, VA that his 3rd grader is not, in fact, being taught to hate white people

THEN passing some draconian law that will probably be abused against all forms of protest to make our electeds feel safer
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 24, 2021, 07:39:19 PM
Imagine thinking this was real and not just something to whip up the rubes

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210625/8a4479df47f46f3323386c5ae56595c2.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 24, 2021, 07:58:40 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/24/us-government-fails-to-collect-over-1-billion-in-debt-from-nearly-1300-colleges-report-says.html

Maybe I'm not seeing something here, but why aren't these schools cut off if they can't pay back or at least attempt to try? 

Someone not paying their student loans wouldn't get that type of favorable treatment.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 25, 2021, 07:45:15 AM
Imagine thinking this was real and not just something to whip up the rubes

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210625/8a4479df47f46f3323386c5ae56595c2.jpg)

If we're really going to do this re: focus on infotainment personalities, how about we at least focus on the whole context. And no I didn't watch Tucker last night but his monologues are easy enough to find in written form.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-if-white-rage-is-a-medical-condition-how-do-you-catch-it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 25, 2021, 09:27:42 AM
If we're really going to do this re: focus on infotainment personalities, how about we at least focus on the whole context. And no I didn't watch Tucker last night but his monologues are easy enough to find in written form.

https://www.foxnews.com/opinion/tucker-carlson-if-white-rage-is-a-medical-condition-how-do-you-catch-it
Josh Hawley is saying the same thing, there's no difference. They're manufacturing an issue.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 25, 2021, 09:40:12 AM
Lol, let this be a lesson that you can play "enlightened centrist" and it's never going to be good enough.

And again, the idea that its just the right rallying against this is unequivocally false.



Sure on any issue you can find people on both sides. But it's predominantly the right wing, and thus is going to be their rally cry.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 25, 2021, 09:41:33 AM
Biden admin to sue State of Georgia over its voting restrictions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 25, 2021, 09:43:16 AM
It's kind of a big deal.

No it's not

Is Trump an poopchute absofucking lootly

But this certainly isn't any worse than the excrement that happened in Seattle with the whole "CHOP" bullshit. It's the same excrement on opposite sides of the coin, a bunch of freaking uneducated mental fucks causing violence and havoc to jerk off to their extreme political views
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 25, 2021, 09:47:39 AM
Biden admin to sue State of Georgia over its voting restrictions.

If anyone looked at the main provisions of that bill its mostly  pretty reasonable  stuff. If the exact same bill was stamped as bipartisan you'd almost certainly have very high approval rates for it, as the things it's suggesting are mostly common sense.

 I imagine that the right would benefit from it (otherwise why else would they propose it) but to suggest the contents are Jim Crow and all this other excrement is bat excrement insane.

I suppose of the bipartisan federal bills get passed this whole thing gets poopood
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 25, 2021, 12:19:10 PM
I imagine that the right would benefit from it (otherwise why else would they propose it) but to suggest the contents are Jim Crow and all this other excrement is bat excrement insane.

I normally don't bat an eye to this kind of rhetoric because its so typical, but the fact that the stupid old codger in the White House (and we wish him good health over these next three years lest his VP take over) could campaign on unifying the country and then SPEW THIS ABSOLUTE HORSESHIT is mind boggling.

New Jim Crow my derriere. The provisions of the Georgia bill would still make voting in Georgia more accessible than say oh I don't know a blue state like New Jersey.

This lawsuit won't go anywhere, and the only reason why this is even a thing is because Democrats know they have a tenuous majority that at least in the House is up in 22.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 25, 2021, 05:05:06 PM

Some "meaningful, thoughtful, strategic, compassionate" (not to mention disingenuous and politically expedient) bullshit courtesy of some politico's 'El Paso-as-Ellis-Island' distorted sense of equivalency:

https://twitter.com/bennyjohnson/status/1408434875351375873





Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 25, 2021, 05:07:43 PM
America couldn't solve the border crisis in the last 100 years

But it's okay now we're going to solve the root cause of every person in the world wanting to leave their country and come here

In the next 3 years...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 28, 2021, 04:28:14 PM
Eesh, this seems like a pretty bad swing and a miss by the Feds - I don't know which administration this case started under and I don't think it really matters because I would expect that it's a fairly bipartisan issue in the truest sense of the word.

https://www.cnbc.com/2021/06/28/judge-dismisses-ftc-antitrust-complaint-against-facebook.html

I won't pretend to make any kind of half baked legal argument here but I've made my views known before on the ludicrous amount of power that FANANG hold; the US Government has been reasonably good at breaking up over reaching monopolies in the past (Microsoft and the Bells being prime examples), but this has been allowed to swell to ridiculous proportions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 28, 2021, 05:06:00 PM
I certainly don't know legal distinctions and what not

But at least in the United States the impression I've gotten is that Facebook is posed to decline.

I think they're in the "MySpace" realm of things. The undisputed current king, but also it's replacements out there are ready to take over.

Talk to a person under 30 and ask them what their thoughts are on Facebook. Most of them use it little to none at all
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 28, 2021, 05:18:52 PM
I certainly don't know legal distinctions and what not

But at least in the United States the impression I've gotten is that Facebook is posed to decline.

I think they're in the "MySpace" realm of things. The undisputed current king, but also it's replacements out there are ready to take over.

Talk to a person under 30 and ask them what their thoughts are on Facebook. Most of them use it little to none at all

Unlike MySpace, Facebook has been ever evolving on multiple fronts - they're smart enough to know that the kids will always move to the next hot thing, so instead of chasing the zeitgeist they simply acquire it. Instagram and Whatsapp are the big ones, but they've bought dozens of other smaller apps. They're not just buying the apps and communities, they're buying the IP and the patents so that even if they are losing the battle for subscribers they're making licensing revenues on the back end.

They're also evolving the core app. No, 20 year olds aren't posting pictures of their lunch on Facebook any more, but they're the dominant force for community groups and increasingly for classified sales - FB Marketplace is becoming the global de facto. Loot, Kijiji, even Craigslist are losing share to it.

Facebook is a monster and will keep becoming bigger if it is left unchecked.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 30, 2021, 09:25:24 PM
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/30/kamala-harris-office-dissent-497290

Apparently Harris's team is a cluster freak and all her staff is treated like excrement.

However this isn't the first time this happened. Apparently at the start of her presidential campaign there was a mass firing and the same thing happened. And yet again there were reports of it when her presidential campaign ended

This doesn't have a whole lot of significance as VP, but could be a very key thing in future presidential candidates when she's on top of the ticket.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 01, 2021, 09:13:11 AM
https://www.politico.com/news/2021/06/30/kamala-harris-office-dissent-497290
Heard the same palace intrigue grousing about Klobuchar (and of course trump).   


"Down in the west Texas town of El Paso
  I fell in love with a Mexican girl..."

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fd/Marty_Robbins_The_Midnight_Special_1973.JPG/177px-Marty_Robbins_The_Midnight_Special_1973.JPG)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 01, 2021, 09:48:33 AM
Supreme Court thinks voter suppression is cool.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 01, 2021, 10:12:16 AM
Supreme Court thinks voter suppression is cool.

Mandating that people either drop off their own vote or do it through a family member or caregiver is now "voter suppression."

Good thing it's actually not because while the Court hasn't been the evil craven right wing crackpots as advertised when Gorsuch, ACB and Kavanaugh were placed on the bench, (see the latest ACA ruling), they mostly maintained a modicum of common sense.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 01, 2021, 10:38:46 AM
The Supreme Court interprets the law that exists (however good or bad that is), they don't decide what's right or wrong.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 01, 2021, 10:44:50 AM
The Supreme Court interprets the law that exists (however good or bad that is), they don't decide what's right or wrong.

In theory. Obergefell is a classic example of right outcome, spotty analysis.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 07, 2021, 09:05:08 AM
Yeah it would be terrible if we taught history accurately.

https://twitter.com/mikepompeo/status/1412109433975488513?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 07, 2021, 10:38:09 AM
Yeah it would be terrible if we taught history accurately.

https://twitter.com/mikepompeo/status/1412109433975488513?s=19

History according to Howard Zinn maybe.

And I can't help but ask, what part of our founding involves teaching children (and this is a direct quote) that "whiteness is a bad deal."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 07, 2021, 11:16:57 AM
History according to Howard Zinn maybe.

And I can't help but ask, what part of our founding involves teaching children (and this is a direct quote) that "whiteness is a bad deal."
The worst deal, perhaps, in the history of trade deals
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 07, 2021, 08:09:13 PM
Yeah it would be terrible if we taught history accurately.

https://twitter.com/mikepompeo/status/1412109433975488513?s=19

Inadvertently making one of the best arguments in favor of teaching that whiteness is a social construct designed to oppress others.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 08, 2021, 07:44:54 AM
whiteness is a social construct designed to oppress others.

Lmao.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 08, 2021, 08:06:41 AM
Lmao.
I know the RW default reaction to language like that is to knee-jerk away from it but how it whiteness not a social construct? Or are you attempting to pretend it's purely a descriptor of fair skin and nothing else at all?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 08, 2021, 08:22:39 AM
I know the RW default reaction to language like that is to knee-jerk away from it but how it whiteness not a social construct? Or are you attempting to pretend it's purely a descriptor of fair skin and nothing else at all?

I'm not pretending anything. It's a descriptor of skin color and further an immutable characteristic. That's it. We shouldn't demonize people based on same or create these idiotic monoliths in which somehow whiteness is bad and basic social wants like a "right to comfort" or "individualism" is considered a hallmark of any sort of supremacy, as if Black people don't value either of those things.

Worse, this excrement is being foisted on children. By the time people are 18, if they want to expose themselves to bullshit social pseudoscience, that's on them and their right.

I can only imagine how it would go if I said Blackness is a social construct wrapped in a culture that accepts if not promotes a fatherless rate at 70%. No, blackness is a presence of melanin. That's it. Go ask any Haitian if they share the same cultural mores as someone from Nigeria, see what they tell you.

The idea that this ubiquitous oppressive structure comes solely from WyPiPo is divisive, social poison that seeks to bind people of all sorts of different nationalities in the same basket.

The Jewish experience is not the same as the Slavic is not the same as the Irish.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 08, 2021, 11:02:23 PM
Imagine holding so hard onto a color descriptor of your melanin content as an identity when it held absolutely zero significance as a social construct.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 09, 2021, 07:41:57 AM
Imagine holding so hard onto a color descriptor of your melanin content as an identity when it held absolutely zero significance as a social construct.

strawman harder.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 10, 2021, 09:39:49 PM
Remember when people thought this guy was some sort of voice of reason?

https://twitter.com/SheriffClarke/status/1412204512266395648?s=19

Moderates are a fantasy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 10, 2021, 09:42:28 PM
Remember when people thought this guy was some sort of voice of reason?

https://twitter.com/SheriffClarke/status/1412204512266395648?s=19

Moderates are a fantasy

I don’t recall thinking that at all. Who thought that?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 10, 2021, 10:10:49 PM
I don’t recall thinking that at all. Who thought that?
I'm not gonna name names but they know who they are.

He got on TV a few years back during Ferguson unrest or something and dropped a few platitudes and some people were like "wow he's a cop AND he's black, both sides!"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 12, 2021, 10:18:33 AM
WSJ Opinion strikes again

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ranked-choice-voting-is-bad-for-everyone-11625674248?mod=e2fb
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 12, 2021, 10:24:42 AM
WSJ Opinion strikes again

https://www.wsj.com/articles/ranked-choice-voting-is-bad-for-everyone-11625674248?mod=e2fb

I only read the first bit because the rest is paywalled, but this is stupid:

Quote
In a free country voters should desire a common good superior to the wishes of private individuals to prevail.

Not only is it an impossible and unreasonable ask, it's also missing the point that the common good and the wishes of private individuals can and should at the very least overlap. You want to pay less tax? Cool, we all do. We do that by making sure that people are educated and healthy and housed and fed, so that they can be productive members of society, so that they generate more than they cost, thus reducing the collective tax requirement. In a right thinking society, the common good and the wishes of private individuals are united. If that isn't the case then the problem isn't the voting system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 12, 2021, 10:27:15 AM
Remember when people thought this guy was some sort of voice of reason?

https://twitter.com/SheriffClarke/status/1412204512266395648?s=19

Moderates are a fantasy

Interesting that's what was taken out of his tweet and not the fact that idk, people are desecrating religious idols with seeming impunity.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on July 12, 2021, 10:34:37 AM
Interesting that's what was taken out of his tweet and not the fact that idk, people are desecrating religious idols with seeming impunity.



https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uLeAot4Zrxo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 12, 2021, 10:55:33 AM
Interesting that's what was taken out of his tweet and not the fact that idk, people are desecrating religious idols with seeming impunity.
Someone lightly defaced our rival high school's statue of St Francis when we beat them in basketball, it was pretty funny.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 12, 2021, 04:22:01 PM
I'm not pretending anything.

 It's a descriptor of skin color and further an immutable characteristic.

That's it.

 We shouldn't demonize people based on same or create these idiotic monoliths in which somehow whiteness is bad and basic social wants like a "right to comfort" or "individualism" is considered a hallmark of any sort of supremacy, as if Black people don't value either of those things.

Worse, this excrement is being foisted on children. By the time people are 18, if they want to expose themselves to bullshit social pseudoscience, that's on them and their right.

I can only imagine how it would go if I said Blackness is a social construct wrapped in a culture that accepts if not promotes a fatherless rate at 70%. No, blackness is a presence of melanin. That's it. Go ask any Haitian if they share the same cultural mores as someone from Nigeria, see what they tell you.

The idea that this ubiquitous oppressive structure comes solely from WyPiPo is divisive, social poison that seeks to bind people of all sorts of different nationalities in the same basket.

The Jewish experience is not the same as the Slavic is not the same as the Irish.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ea/Thats_all_folks.svg/319px-Thats_all_folks.svg.png)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on July 12, 2021, 09:04:03 PM
You can't make this excrement up

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/lauren-boebert-cpac-colorado-undemployment-b1882735.html?utm_source=reddit.com
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 12, 2021, 10:46:23 PM
You can't make this excrement up

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/lauren-boebert-cpac-colorado-undemployment-b1882735.html?utm_source=reddit.com

She truly is a vile person.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 13, 2021, 06:58:37 AM
Is Fauci ouchie supposed to mean vaccine?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 13, 2021, 10:49:49 AM
She truly is a vile person.

Lol, cry harder.

Is Fauci ouchie supposed to mean vaccine?

It is, and its completely cringe.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 13, 2021, 11:31:45 AM
Lauren Brobert's is a freakable Shock-G (Digital Underground/The Humpty Dance).  The 'tough guy' owns a ginmill named Shooters in the town of Rifles, Colorado?  Comes off as another media-ho-turned-self-parody in the making.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Lauren_Boebert.JPG/276px-Lauren_Boebert.JPG)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0f/AnonymousBlogger.jpg/320px-AnonymousBlogger.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c6/Humptydancesingle.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 13, 2021, 11:34:34 AM
Lauren Brobert's is a freakable Shock-G (Digital Underground/The Humpty Dance).  The 'tough guy' owns a ginmill named Shooters in the town of Rifles, Colorado?  Comes off as another media-ho-turned-self-parody in the making.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Lauren_Boebert.JPG/276px-Lauren_Boebert.JPG)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0f/AnonymousBlogger.jpg/320px-AnonymousBlogger.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c6/Humptydancesingle.jpg)


RIP Humpty.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 13, 2021, 08:18:31 PM
https://twitter.com/caitlinzemma/status/1415116134710403081?s=19

https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1415118662437154820?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 13, 2021, 10:35:10 PM
https://twitter.com/caitlinzemma/status/1415116134710403081?s=19

https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1415118662437154820?s=19

Getting the Tweet unavailable error for Jeff Stein’s tweet.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 14, 2021, 08:06:43 AM
Getting the Tweet unavailable error for Jeff Stein’s tweet.
Guess he deleted it - he posted what he thought the breakdown of spending within the bill would be
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 14, 2021, 08:28:55 AM
Tennessee's chapter of the Republican death cult fired their top vaccine official for the offence of informing the public that teenagers are allowed under the law to make their own vaccination decisions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 14, 2021, 02:06:37 PM
Glad to see Kamala weigh in to call those subverting democracy in Texas as operating in the legacy of those who marched at Selma.

That's not incredibly hyperbolic/tone deaf/false, etc etc etc.

Siri, what do you get when a politician is afforded power based on absolutely nothing but her demographics and ability to bang Willie Brown?!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 14, 2021, 04:46:47 PM


Glad to see Kamala weigh in to call those subverting democracy in Texas

The ones trying to pass a voter suppression bill?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 14, 2021, 04:59:56 PM

The ones trying to pass a voter protection bill?

FYP.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 14, 2021, 07:42:29 PM
Joe WTF Manchin on the Democrats' bill:

Quote
"I know they have the climate portion in here, and I'm concerned about that," Manchin said moments after Biden met with Senate Democrats in the Capitol on Wednesday.
"Because if they're eliminating fossils, and I'm finding out there's a lot of language in places they're eliminating fossils, which is very, very disturbing, because if you're sticking your head in the sand, and saying that fossil (fuel) has to be eliminated in America, and they want to get rid of it, and thinking that's going to clean up the global climate, it won't clean it up all. If anything, it would be worse."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 14, 2021, 09:55:36 PM
Joe WTF Manchin on the Democrats' bill:


Manchin is one of Big Oil's best friends on the hill.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 16, 2021, 06:11:44 PM

https://jonathanturley.org/2021/07/16/let-them-die-fairfax-pta-and-naacp-officer-calls-for-the-death-of-who-oppose-crt-to-die/

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 16, 2021, 06:28:52 PM
https://jonathanturley.org/2021/07/16/let-them-die-fairfax-pta-and-naacp-officer-calls-for-the-death-of-who-oppose-crt-to-die/



Literally everything in that speech except those three words seems fine. Not sure why that suddenly appeared in there.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2021, 08:01:43 PM
Literally all people need to do to make CRT hysteria go away is ignore it and yet here we are.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 18, 2021, 10:13:25 PM
https://twitter.com/DrRJKavanagh/status/1416954861434851328?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on July 19, 2021, 05:30:35 AM
https://www.theroot.com/texas-senate-passes-bill-to-remove-required-lessons-on-1847313111

The old "If you don't know about racism it doesn't exist" strategy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 19, 2021, 07:39:53 AM
https://www.theroot.com/texas-senate-passes-bill-to-remove-required-lessons-on-1847313111

The old "If you don't know about racism it doesn't exist" strategy

Because if anyone is in a position to lecture anyone else, its a website that employs total non-racist Michael Harriot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 19, 2021, 07:46:57 AM
https://twitter.com/DrRJKavanagh/status/1416954861434851328?s=19
Lol.  "Stelter goes in for the easy layup interview..."

(https://i.gifer.com/FcQ2.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 19, 2021, 07:52:04 AM
I wonder if Lindsey can actually get all 50 republicans to leave town for the reconciliation vote (that probably won't happen anyway)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on July 19, 2021, 08:26:33 AM
Because if anyone is in a position to lecture anyone else, its a website that employs total non-racist Michael Harriot.

Ahh the old, "it doesn't matter what the bill says if one person that works at the company writing an article about the bill doesn't align with my views".

Is this source to your liking master? 

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/social-justice/texas-senate-votes-to-remove-required-lessons-on-civil-rights

It's the source being quoted in the original article.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 19, 2021, 10:06:17 AM
Ahh the old, "it doesn't matter what the bill says if one person that works at the company writing an article about the bill doesn't align with my views".

Is this source to your liking master? 

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/social-justice/texas-senate-votes-to-remove-required-lessons-on-civil-rights

It's the source being quoted in the original article.
All MLK will be banned from the curriculum except that one quote every racist has memorized.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 19, 2021, 12:57:28 PM
Lol.  "Stelter goes in for the easy layup interview..."

(https://i.gifer.com/FcQ2.gif)


Stelter's a turd & Katy Tur has major rackage

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/Rather%2C_Tur%2C_Dowd_%26_Stelter_%40_SXSW_2017_%2832703089504%29.jpg/800px-Rather%2C_Tur%2C_Dowd_%26_Stelter_%40_SXSW_2017_%2832703089504%29.jpg)

Stelter always reminded me of this priss

https://getyarn.io/yarn-clip/25eec92f-07f0-4dbf-b4d6-0165042d8ed1
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 19, 2021, 12:59:38 PM



Katy Tur has major rackage

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/Rather%2C_Tur%2C_Dowd_%26_Stelter_%40_SXSW_2017_%2832703089504%29.jpg/800px-Rather%2C_Tur%2C_Dowd_%26_Stelter_%40_SXSW_2017_%2832703089504%29.jpg)

Daaaang

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on July 19, 2021, 01:03:28 PM
impressive milk tanks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 20, 2021, 12:51:25 PM
Texas' Senate no longer thinks it's important for schools to teach that the KKK is morally wrong.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 20, 2021, 01:06:35 PM
Ahh the old, "it doesn't matter what the bill says if one person that works at the company writing an article about the bill doesn't align with my views".


All I did was make a remark as to the source material. That's all. No different then the excrement I'd get if I started sharing articles from fox or say dailywire (though those publications aren't openly racist)

All MLK will be banned from the curriculum except that one quote every racist has memorized.

Yes, I agree, racists should really stop using the "riots are the language of the unheard" shtick considering what he says about two minutes later in the same exact speech.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on July 20, 2021, 01:14:03 PM
(https://i.redd.it/eqpzirdk6dc71.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 20, 2021, 01:25:17 PM



 dailywire (though those publications aren't openly racist)



lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 20, 2021, 01:41:52 PM
(https://i.redd.it/eqpzirdk6dc71.jpg)

LOL what a freaking strawman!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 20, 2021, 02:14:06 PM
LOL what a freaking strawman!
Like the entire anti-CRT "movement"?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on July 20, 2021, 05:38:11 PM
  ;D ;D ;D
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 20, 2021, 10:22:24 PM
https://twitter.com/rcalcagno3/status/1417621492964028416?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 21, 2021, 01:36:13 AM
https://twitter.com/rcalcagno3/status/1417621492964028416?s=21

Yeah Bezos only paid 973 million dollars in taxes last year

But because propublica has some proprietary formula that says rich people should pay taxes differently from everyone else, he didn't actually pay any taxes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 21, 2021, 07:49:01 AM
Like the entire anti-CRT "movement"?

I mean, there's heaps of evidence showing that at a formative age kids are being taught to hate based on skin color, but you stan for neo-racism however you want.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 21, 2021, 11:51:39 AM
https://twitter.com/davenewworld_2/status/1417697815661326344?s=21

Uh
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 21, 2021, 05:45:09 PM
Arkansas bill which outlaws gender affirming treatment for trans youth blocked by federal courts.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2021/07/21/judge-blocks-arkansas-trans-healthcare-ban/amp/ (https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2021/07/21/judge-blocks-arkansas-trans-healthcare-ban/amp/)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 21, 2021, 06:11:19 PM


I mean, there's heaps of evidence showing that at a formative age kids are being taught to hate based on skin color,

Yeah, by their parents who are screaming at the school board about the CRT boogeyman.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 21, 2021, 06:59:23 PM
https://twitter.com/davenewworld_2/status/1417697815661326344?s=21

Uh

The article was kinda confusing

But kind of made it sound like he was accusing someone else of saying that?

https://lawandcrime.com/politics/white-city-council-member-in-alabama-shocks-meeting-with-racial-slur-do-we-have-a-house-n-in-here/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Quote
This leads directly into Bryant’s use of the racial slur saying, “Let’s get to the n-word.” before using the line “Do we have a house n***er in here”, pointing to his left, apparently directing attention to city council member Veronica Freeman and claiming that Newton used the slur in reference to her.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 21, 2021, 07:11:33 PM
Arkansas bill which outlaws gender affirming treatment for trans youth blocked by federal courts.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2021/07/21/judge-blocks-arkansas-trans-healthcare-ban/amp/ (https://www.forbes.com/sites/joewalsh/2021/07/21/judge-blocks-arkansas-trans-healthcare-ban/amp/)


Quote
Known as the Save Adolescents From Experimentation Act, the law prohibits doctors from offering transition-related surgery, hormone therapy or puberty-blocking drugs to any transgender people under the age of 18.

Not sure what the right answer is on this excrement. But having a law to prevent people under the age of 18 from having transition related therapy isn't unreasonable.

The hormone and puberty drugs on the other hand doesn't make quite as much sense, as it kinda defeats the purpose of the drugs which is to limit prepuberty changes.

There's a lot of common sense lacking from all political parties
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 21, 2021, 08:50:43 PM
Not sure what the right answer is on this excrement. But having a law to prevent people under the age of 18 from having transition related therapy isn't unreasonable.

The hormone and puberty drugs on the other hand doesn't make quite as much sense, as it kinda defeats the purpose of the drugs which is to limit prepuberty changes.

There's a lot of common sense lacking from all political parties

Even without this law, no child has willy nilly access to hormone therapy or other transition related treatments. The amount of hoops anyone has to jump through at any age in order to be approved for transition therapy would stop that from happening. Arkansas' legislation is at-best trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist and at worst is depriving people who can prove that they qualify for transition therapy the treatment they need and thus causing undue mental stress and psychological damage.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 22, 2021, 05:47:52 AM
Even without this law, no child has willy nilly access to hormone therapy or other transition related treatments. The amount of hoops anyone has to jump through at any age in order to be approved for transition therapy would stop that from happening. Arkansas' legislation is at-best trying to solve a problem that doesn't exist and at worst is depriving people who can prove that they qualify for transition therapy the treatment they need and thus causing undue mental stress and psychological damage.

I meant to say not having access to transition based surgery isn't unreasonable. The other stuff is overboard

But unless there's a severe obvious biological defect, I don't think you should be able to consent a young child into gender altering surgery.

The hormonal excrement surely has issues too, but at least that's not nearly extreme
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 22, 2021, 12:13:09 PM
(https://media.giphy.com/media/wJwLCj9GjMaYw/giphy.gif)


when's training camp?...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 22, 2021, 10:29:19 PM
Ghouls get rekt

https://twitter.com/crampell/status/1418288577788657668?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 22, 2021, 10:36:58 PM
Libs get rekt

https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1418351164668665861?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 23, 2021, 12:46:47 PM
Nothing but virtue signaling

https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1418380421570629632?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 23, 2021, 01:16:25 PM
Nothing but virtue signaling

https://twitter.com/HawleyMO/status/1418380421570629632?s=19

At least the left and right can agree on one important thing.

Not to teach kids anything freaking useful in school.

Yet another reason why Asian and Indian children are so much more intelligent than Americans
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 23, 2021, 03:22:58 PM
At least the left and right can agree on one important thing.

Not to teach kids anything freaking useful in school.

Yet another reason why Asian and Indian children are so much more intelligent than Americans
If you read the following tweet, his bill would require schools that receive federal funding to... teach extremely basic things that they already cover.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 24, 2021, 11:19:06 PM
This is so stupid

https://twitter.com/jacobkornbluh/status/1418625140708020224?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 25, 2021, 06:12:51 AM
This is so stupid

https://twitter.com/jacobkornbluh/status/1418625140708020224?s=19

I agree it's a completely stupid and ridiculous policy.

I also think the comments on there about being thinking this being a lid on freedom of speech is ridiculous.

They don't want to include a stock in their retirement fund because of its stances. This is far from someone's sanctions
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 28, 2021, 01:46:46 PM
This fuckin lady

https://twitter.com/mstratford/status/1420422062431215621?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 29, 2021, 03:06:10 PM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1420835741760991233?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 29, 2021, 03:08:05 PM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1420835741760991233?s=21
Launch the nukes Xi (but give Cato a heads up to get out of town)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 29, 2021, 03:24:18 PM
Launch the nukes Xi (but give Cato a heads up to get out of town)

They're already conducting biological warfare on themselves.nukes just seem redundant
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 29, 2021, 08:04:42 PM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1420835741760991233?s=21

While Taylor-Greene's a pig I gotta admit that bespectacled Colorado saloon-owner's porkable. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 29, 2021, 08:14:56 PM
While Taylor-Greene's a pig I gotta admit that bespectacled Colorado saloon-owner's porkable.
There's difference between hate freak and annoyingly stupid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 29, 2021, 09:14:21 PM
There's difference between hate freak and annoyingly stupid.
Point taken.  Now tell that to an angry rooster. 

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 30, 2021, 06:03:37 AM
Point taken.  Now tell that to an angry rooster.
Sometimes Foghorn Leghorn gotta try some wrong.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 30, 2021, 06:25:09 AM
While Taylor-Greene's a pig I gotta admit that bespectacled Colorado saloon-owner's porkable.
I would. Either.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 30, 2021, 06:33:42 AM
I would. Either.
Marge?  Eww.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on July 30, 2021, 06:52:43 AM
Marge?  Eww.
Double ewwies
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 30, 2021, 07:36:41 AM
MGT has the face of an angry grape, so no thanks.

Boebert on the other hand? Not even a question. Insta-smash.  Please keep the glasses on and further the hot librarian look by saying "this book is due back Thursday" (real ones will get the reference).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 30, 2021, 07:54:17 AM
Counterpoint:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210730/659191ad968f772c32e0530e6b5af9af.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 30, 2021, 08:06:56 AM
Counterpoint:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210730/659191ad968f772c32e0530e6b5af9af.jpg)

I don't see the improvement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 30, 2021, 08:10:24 AM
I don't see the improvement.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210730/efb7fa0c8d6b15f1d61dea68efc201e3.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 30, 2021, 08:15:21 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210730/efb7fa0c8d6b15f1d61dea68efc201e3.jpg)

Worse.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 30, 2021, 08:15:32 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210730/efb7fa0c8d6b15f1d61dea68efc201e3.jpg)

LOL
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 30, 2021, 09:18:42 AM
lifeaccording2Marge
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 30, 2021, 09:19:33 AM
Counterpoint:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210730/659191ad968f772c32e0530e6b5af9af.jpg)

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9246917/Marjorie-Taylor-Green-openly-cheated-husband-men-gym.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 30, 2021, 10:00:33 AM
Once you already know the face and the person, it's too late.  She isn't hot enough for the Hate F***
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 30, 2021, 10:04:54 AM
Once you already know the face and the person, it's too late.  She isn't hot enough for the Hate F***
Sinema though
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 30, 2021, 11:13:18 AM
Sinema though

<3 <3 <3
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 30, 2021, 02:38:25 PM
                                                (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/35/Cameron_Diaz_WE_2012_Shankbone.JPG/192px-Cameron_Diaz_WE_2012_Shankbone.JPG)
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210730/efb7fa0c8d6b15f1d61dea68efc201e3.jpg)

Quote from: Badger
Sinema though

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/Rep_Kyrsten_Sinema%2C_Official_Portrait_%28cropped%29.jpg/176px-Rep_Kyrsten_Sinema%2C_Official_Portrait_%28cropped%29.jpg)
Krysten Sinema: on record as bisexual (i.e. she gets to eat hoo-ha and "hit from the red tees") and a non-theist to boot - my kind of flip-flopper. 

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c7/Lauren_Boebert_%2850763895983%29.jpg/320px-Lauren_Boebert_%2850763895983%29.jpg)
Lauren Boebert: gun-toting' freak who's crazier than a shlthouse rat.  Kirsten + Lauren + me to make three and it's 'The Aristocrat Joke' in the flesh.


As for the Marge the sow:

"Come to me!....your face  it looks like cum to me!!!!...."
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/84/Luciano_Pavarotti_15.06.02_cropped2_%28squared%29.jpg)


.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 31, 2021, 12:57:05 PM
You what(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210731/36869fc672a410e19020faf77b067dbb.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 31, 2021, 02:16:38 PM
Hottest job market in my lifetime but people still shouldn't have to pay their rent

GTFO with that excrement
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 31, 2021, 09:18:34 PM
You what(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210731/36869fc672a410e19020faf77b067dbb.jpg)

From the same tlt titan who gave us  "we have to pass the bill so that you can find out what is in it."  'natch' Nance.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 31, 2021, 09:35:56 PM
Hottest job market in my lifetime

but people still shouldn't have to pay their rent

GTFO with that excrement

'yip yip yip yip yip yip yip yip  mum mum mum mum mum mum....get a job'

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ysKhbaLyIFw
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 01, 2021, 08:12:27 AM
Hottest job market in my lifetime but people still shouldn't have to pay their rent

GTFO with that excrement
People shouldn't be homeless
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 01, 2021, 08:20:21 AM
People shouldn't be homeless

People shouldn't be living in someone else's home without paying their rent

This bill wasn't designed to solve homelessness. It was designed to keep people from becoming homeless because of the extreme uncertainty during an unprecedented global pandemic where the whole world literally shut down extremely quickly.

The whole world's back open, with literally the hottest job market in the lifetimes of most working adults

If you want laws to combat price gouging or rent being massively inflated you can make a good argument there.

But to suggest that people shouldn't have to pay their rent for 2 freaking years is nonsense
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 01, 2021, 08:29:23 AM
People shouldn't be living in someone else's home without paying their rent

This bill wasn't designed to solve homelessness. It was designed to keep people from becoming homeless because of the extreme uncertainty during an unprecedented global pandemic where the whole world literally shut down extremely quickly.

The whole world's back open, with literally the hottest job market in the lifetimes of most working adults

If you want laws to combat price gouging or rent being massively inflated you can make a good argument there.

But to suggest that people shouldn't have to pay their rent for 2 freaking years is nonsense
I'm not reading all that excrement but someone being homeless is infinitely worse than someone losing some return on an investment.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 01, 2021, 10:15:13 AM
Who are the people that are not paying rent yet not evicted yet because of the moritorium?  Obviously it isn't just 1 type of person, but figuring out the reason they aren't paying rent is the solution.  Some of them are just freaking too lazy to work because it's easier to get unemployment.  But that isn't all of them.  It's a complicated issue. 

Why are there so many job openings and so few available workers?  When the unemployment benefits end at the end of September, we'll find out.  Either it's lazy fuckers or people holding out for better wages.  Or both.  Probably both. 

I don't want to see anyone homeless. Our society should always strive for everyone to be above a basic standard if living.  But there comes a point where you either can work or you can't for whatever reason. Everyone that can work and isn't funded to retire yet, should.  Sorry for "both sidesing" this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 01, 2021, 11:29:53 AM
Who are the people that are not paying rent yet not evicted yet because of the moritorium?  Obviously it isn't just 1 type of person, but figuring out the reason they aren't paying rent is the solution.  Some of them are just freaking too lazy to work because it's easier to get unemployment.  But that isn't all of them.  It's a complicated issue. 

Why are there so many job openings and so few available workers?  When the unemployment benefits end at the end of September, we'll find out.  Either it's lazy fuckers or people holding out for better wages.  Or both.  Probably both. 

I don't want to see anyone homeless. Our society should always strive for everyone to be above a basic standard if living.  But there comes a point where you either can work or you can't for whatever reason. Everyone that can work and isn't funded to retire yet, should.  Sorry for "both sidesing" this.

Be a jerk, go to work, be a jerk, go to work...  : )
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EZLWD75KKGA
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 01, 2021, 11:36:21 AM
Who are the people that are not paying rent yet not evicted yet because of the moritorium?  Obviously it isn't just 1 type of person, but figuring out the reason they aren't paying rent is the solution.  Some of them are just freaking too lazy to work because it's easier to get unemployment.  But that isn't all of them.  It's a complicated issue. 

Why are there so many job openings and so few available workers?  When the unemployment benefits end at the end of September, we'll find out.  Either it's lazy fuckers or people holding out for better wages.  Or both.  Probably both. 

I don't want to see anyone homeless. Our society should always strive for everyone to be above a basic standard if living.  But there comes a point where you either can work or you can't for whatever reason. Everyone that can work and isn't funded to retire yet, should.  Sorry for "both sidesing" this.

Corporate interests will keep the cost of wages as low as possible while driving the cost of rents as high as possible. Somewhere in the middle of that is a whole strata of society for whom income is insufficient to pay rent.

We are badly out of balance on the relative cost of living for far too many people. That's true here as well, where our housing costs are through the roof. Social housing would be one answer to the problem, or at least a significant part of it, but it's a vote loser because far too many voters have fallen into the "me first" trap, and the idea of their taxes being used to build houses they won't live in is anathema because they won't think past incredibly rudimentary concepts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 01, 2021, 12:54:35 PM
Corporate interests will keep the cost of wages as low as possible while driving the cost of rents as high as possible. Somewhere in the middle of that is a whole strata of society for whom income is insufficient to pay rent.

We are badly out of balance on the relative cost of living for far too many people. That's true here as well, where our housing costs are through the roof. Social housing would be one answer to the problem, or at least a significant part of it, but it's a vote loser because far too many voters have fallen into the "me first" trap, and the idea of their taxes being used to build houses they won't live in is anathema because they won't think past incredibly rudimentary concepts.

1. Yes.

2. Do you use anathema this much in your non-internet conversations?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 01, 2021, 01:15:12 PM
1. Yes.

2. Do you use anathema this much in your non-internet conversations?

Probably. I hadn't noticed I used it a lot, but I'll take your word for it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 01, 2021, 01:47:30 PM
I'm not reading all that excrement but someone being homeless is infinitely worse than someone losing some return on an investment.

You're right the answer to homelessness is stealing.

I'm not pro homelessness, this has nothing to do with social safety nets.

You can be far to the left and make arguments like JE about how the government should have more subsidized housing and all that kinda stuff. But those opinions are not of this issue

Which comes down to people who have been able to pay their rent in the past, haven't had to these last two years.

And the current solution is to allow them to steal their housing indefinitely, for literally no freaking reason
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 01, 2021, 07:04:18 PM
You're right the answer to homelessness is stealing.

I'm not pro homelessness, this has nothing to do with social safety nets.

You can be far to the left and make arguments like JE about how the government should have more subsidized housing and all that kinda stuff. But those opinions are not of this issue

Which comes down to people who have been able to pay their rent in the past, haven't had to these last two years.

And the current solution is to allow them to steal their housing indefinitely, for literally no freaking reason
Landlords deserve to have their hoarded property stolen
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 01, 2021, 08:29:20 PM
Landlords deserve to have their hoarded property stolen

You do realize that every landlord is not rich or Donald Trump?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 01, 2021, 08:44:58 PM
Landlords deserve to have their hoarded property stolen

Lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 01, 2021, 09:03:47 PM
You do realize that every landlord is not rich or Donald Trump?
Me thinking about small landlords:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210802/3e2d42e95f7e468e75aebac3b431a747.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 01, 2021, 10:47:05 PM
I hear Cuba is lovely this time of year
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 01, 2021, 10:51:48 PM
I hear Cuba is lovely this time of year
Good one grandpa, let's get you to bed
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 02, 2021, 07:55:28 AM
I work in the property management industry. It's booming.

People who aren't paying their rent can't. That's it. It's not laziness, it's straight-up financial disability.

And let's stop with the narrative of a booming job market. Yes, there are thousands of service jobs that pay either minimum wage or less plus tips. So?

If the problem is that unemployment pays more than a person can make at any job they're qualified for, the problem isn't the amount of the money they're being given on unemployment.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 02, 2021, 08:20:55 AM
I work in the property management industry. It's booming.

People who aren't paying their rent can't. That's it. It's not laziness, it's straight-up financial disability.

And let's stop with the narrative of a booming job market. Yes, there are thousands of service jobs that pay either minimum wage or less plus tips. So?

If the problem is that unemployment pays more than a person can make at any job they're qualified for, the problem isn't the amount of the money they're being given on unemployment.

Yes, lets stop with the inconvenient fact that people could absolutely go acquire a job in order to pay rent because its totally destructive to the case being made that somehow people should be able to live for free on someone else's property in perpetuity.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 02, 2021, 08:38:45 AM
Yes, lets stop with the inconvenient fact that people could absolutely go acquire a job in order to pay rent because its totally destructive to the case being made that somehow people should be able to live for free on someone else's property in perpetuity.

Except that the problem is that those jobs don't pay enough money to cover the cost of living in that property. While there are definitely lazy, shitty people who expect the world to serve them up their every need without doing anything for it, there are terrifyingly large numbers of people who do work and who are struggling to put a roof over their family's head and that is a major issue.

It's funny that I'm on Badger's side here (to an extent) and being accused of being far left when I'm actually a private landlord and therefore theoretically part of the problem. I'm on several landlord and tenant groups and the number of families who are in desperate straits is really worrying; there are also a lot of very shitty landlords who have no place being providers of one of the most basic elements of human survival.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on August 02, 2021, 09:12:21 AM
Except that the problem is that those jobs don't pay enough money to cover the cost of living in that property. While there are definitely lazy, shitty people who expect the world to serve them up their every need without doing anything for it, there are terrifyingly large numbers of people who do work and who are struggling to put a roof over their family's head and that is a major issue.

There was a time when a manager of a restaurant, even if it was mcdonald's could support his family as the wife took care of the home.  That no longer exists.  I guess it still exists in MJ's mind, but in reality it doesn't.  That is the true root cause of this economic problem.

Are there other issues at hand, yes.  People are terrible with money, but the fact of the matter is the numbers don't add up to make ends meet. 

Say you are trying to turn your life around.  You move out to long island to get away from high rent prices in the city to save money, at the sacrifice of commuting to NYC everyday for your new $30k a year job.  In order to get just get to work you're paying $480 per month ($360 for monthly pass +120 for subway fare) or nearly $6,000 a year.  That is 20% of your salary (before taxes) on transportation to your job.

The math doesn't work.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 02, 2021, 09:41:49 AM
Except that the problem is that those jobs don't pay enough money to cover the cost of living in that property.

I want to live in a $5,000 beachfront apartment in Long Branch.

I can't because of my present financial situation.

At what point do people get held accountable for overextending themselves?

There was a time when a manager of a restaurant, even if it was mcdonald's could support his family as the wife took care of the home.  That no longer exists.  I guess it still exists in MJ's mind, but in reality it doesn't.  That is the true root cause of this economic problem.

This is categorically untrue, except we now live in a society where everyone's trying to keep up with the Jones's so to speak. Some managers at Mickey D's make upwards of 60-65 a year.

Funny enough, that's what I'm making in full disclosure since you want to go there. How am I in my uninfinite wisdom able to make it work then on an island that is notorious for its insane cost of living?

Idk, maybe its because my only debt is law school student loans and a mortgage, and I've specifically held off on having kids and the expenses that come with it until either a bump in salary or I successfully pay off my loans.

People compound bad financial decisions with even worse financial decisions and then look for a bailout. I'm not saying that's the entirety of those currently staring down the barrel of an eviction due to the moratorium expiring, but they're also not poor souls who through no fault of their own can't support themselves either. The truth as always lies somewhere in the middle as opposed to the frankly Mao-ist outlook that landlords are vermin who should be exterminated.

You can't just legislate out personal accountability.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 02, 2021, 09:47:30 AM
I want to live in a $5,000 beachfront apartment in Long Branch.

I can't because of my present financial situation.

At what point do people get held accountable for overextending themselves?

Sure. I have no sympathy for people living in property they can't afford when there is property available that they can. The problem is that for too many households there isn't any property that they can afford on a full time income.

Private landlords are good at providing good quality mid and upper range homes, but lower budget properties are generally very poor because of the insistence on making margins. I think that entry level housing is better provided as a social service - not free of charge, but basic accommodation kept to an essential level of quality and cleanliness and repair and rented at a level commensurate with a lower end full time income. I have no problem with private and corporate landlords making money from renting good quality homes to people who can afford it, but I have a big problem with slumlords making money from renting crumbling, bugridden shitholes to people who have no alternative options.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 02, 2021, 01:08:57 PM
Why is it college students are easily able to find something affordable, yet adults are not?

And who the freak is commuting from long Island and raking the train subway etc to go work at Walmart or Costco?

Finding a job that pays 15 dollars an hour is very very easy these days.

The list of companies that have set a wave floor of 15 an hour is incredible.

Not going to deny a laundry list of economic and job problems in the United States. But Americans are absolute freaking retards when it comes to managing their money

That's why in some countries literally just requiring employees to put 8% of their salary into a retirement account has made a world of difference.

People in America are just dumb derriere motherfuckers
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on August 02, 2021, 02:03:05 PM
I've seen plenty of people who work hard, over 40 hours a week, for over $15 an hour really struggle with the ability to rent a shitty one bedroom in a place they felt safe. Plenty of people who pay north of 40% of their income in rent still live in absolute dumpsters because thats what the market dictates and they started off with excrement finances as a teenager/young adult.

Many do choose to move away from all of their friends and social supports to places with lower costs of living, but also take their skilled but poorly compensated work with them, leaving the wealthy, newly settled people in my town wondering why all of their favorite restaurants that they moved here to be close to are struggling with quality and consistency.

The answer to similar questions in the 30s/40s was a ton of actually good federally subsidized housing (mostly just for white people - programs then stopped when the courts determined the actually good housing couldn't be segregated, whoops) but now if the federal government provides good housing it's socialism so now millions are at the mercy of benevolent landlords who we sometimes give vouchers to. Oh well.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 02, 2021, 02:10:32 PM


Why is it college students are easily able to find something affordable, yet adults are not?

You know there are homeless college students too right?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 02, 2021, 02:59:21 PM
Why is it college students are easily able to find something affordable, yet adults are not?

Most usually factor housing into their student loans. Also add on about 2 more roommates than the house should have.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 02, 2021, 04:05:19 PM
Just because we all know that political arguments tend to be excessively long winded and go nowhere because everyone has their minds made up.

I think it's reasonable to say that the economic situation in the US (and honestly the whole world) is fucked up. I'm definitely guilty of blaming people for all their own problems when there's no question the system in place is not optimal and there are systemic issues that need to be resolved.

I just find it interesting how naturally everyone in the world goes towards an argumentative pissing match about their fringe views (ie me saying it's people's own fault, Badgers views on rent landlords etc)

But people don't tend to find the common sense middle grounds which would resolve many issues and most people could get behind and come to a compromise. Ie making finance a core part of educational curriculums like we have with English Math Science, Art.

Or people have monstrous student loans with no way to pay.

Obviously on political ideology the approaches to these issues would be different, but I'd imagine if the whole world wasn't ignorant assholes it would be possible to find solutions to these things that both sides could be content with.

(yup this is me with my typical apolitical waffling)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 02, 2021, 09:35:37 PM
Good one grandpa, let's get you to bed

B, while you can be a prick's prick--and god bless you for it lad--you're better than coming off as a sniping ageist, i.e. a bigot (however you wanna spin it). 

"Rape ideas, not people" (A. Hoffman: "Revolution For the Hell of It" - 1968) - yes, I suppose I'm an ageist's target audience. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 02, 2021, 11:32:25 PM
https://www.king5.com/video/news/local/young-girls-lemonade-stand-in-everett-shut-down-while-nearby-homeless-camp-remains/281-65288f26-77fd-4197-ba30-9e9d59a5babe
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 03, 2021, 07:46:42 AM
Huge proxy war between the good dems and bad dems in Ohio's 11th congressional district today.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 03, 2021, 10:37:37 AM
Brown v. Turner (the 'leftier' Turner's outspent Brown by more than 2-to-1.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 03, 2021, 03:32:25 PM
Highly concerning that democrats are looking into changing the rules of retirements to steal money from people's IRAs to pay for their latest welfare/infrastructure bill
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 03, 2021, 03:41:03 PM
Highly concerning that democrats are looking into changing the rules of retirements to steal money from people's IRAs to pay for their latest welfare/infrastructure bill

What's mine is mine and what's yours is mine too
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 03, 2021, 04:02:08 PM
Highly concerning that democrats are looking into changing the rules of retirements to steal money from people's IRAs to pay for their latest welfare/infrastructure bill

I missed this.  Are you talking about them considering going after mega-IRA's?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 03, 2021, 04:24:16 PM
I missed this.  Are you talking about them considering going after mega-IRA's?

Yes

Their definition of mega IRAs is highly concerning

If you're talking about loopholes like Peter Thiel I think that's completely understandable and reasonable

But them calling IRAs with 5 million dollars in it Mega IRAs is insane and an extremely dangerous slippery slope

I think it's blatant robbery for them to change the rules of IRAs after the fact.

If they want to change something change it going forwards on future contributions. But you can't change the rules on already accounted for money
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 03, 2021, 04:51:49 PM
Yes

Their definition of mega IRAs is highly concerning

If you're talking about loopholes like Peter Thiel I think that's completely understandable and reasonable

But them calling IRAs with 5 million dollars in it Mega IRAs is insane and an extremely dangerous slippery slope

I think it's blatant robbery for them to change the rules of IRAs after the fact.

If they want to change something change it going forwards on future contributions. But you can't change the rules on already accounted for money

I can agree about slippery slopes, but do you know how hard it would be for one person to get $5 million in a traditional or ROTH IRA the way most people do for retirement?  If you maxed it out for 30 years and earned 10% interest you'd have about $1-$2 million.  The only people with over $5 million in a traditional or ROTH IRA would be either someone that worked for 40-50 years, started saving when they were very young, and earned an excellent interest rate....or someone who found a loophole like Thiel.  I can't imagine there are shitloads of people with over $5 million in a typical IRA for retirement.   They should raise that number some though to account for that. If you talk about 401Ks, different story.

2 IRAs that may matter more are Inherited IRAs and Non-deductible IRAs.  Non-deductibles, even though they are taxed initially, don't pay tax on earnings until they are withdrawn, so they could get large in value.  You could have a large inherited IRA if you still fall under the old rules before 2020 where you can take automatic distributions based of your expected lifespan and you are pretty young.  Not that common I don't think.

I think you need to find a way not to punish people that somehow found a way to do it the right way and get large sums in there, but I don't think it would frankly be that much money they'd collect.  I don't think it's a good idea to change the rules after the fact, I agree.  But change them going forward.

EDIT: Looked it up.  There are about 28,000 people with IRAs over $5 million.  More than I expected, but I wonder how many of those are people who saved it the way the system was intended (by working hard and saving as they go)? 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 03, 2021, 05:28:26 PM
dcm is just regretting his decision to funnel all of his money he's ever made into retirement funds instead of going out and spending it on cold booze and hot women like we told him to, and justifying his error by being upset that Commie Joe is going to spend it all on horse drawn carriages for poor people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 03, 2021, 06:39:29 PM
I can agree about slippery slopes, but do you know how hard it would be for one person to get $5 million in a traditional or ROTH IRA the way most people do for retirement?  If you maxed it out for 30 years and earned 10% interest you'd have about $1-$2 million.  The only people with over $5 million in a traditional or ROTH IRA would be either someone that worked for 40-50 years, started saving when they were very young, and earned an excellent interest rate....or someone who found a loophole like Thiel.  I can't imagine there are shitloads of people with over $5 million in a typical IRA for retirement.   They should raise that number some though to account for that. If you talk about 401Ks, different story.

2 IRAs that may matter more are Inherited IRAs and Non-deductible IRAs.  Non-deductibles, even though they are taxed initially, don't pay tax on earnings until they are withdrawn, so they could get large in value.  You could have a large inherited IRA if you still fall under the old rules before 2020 where you can take automatic distributions based of your expected lifespan and you are pretty young.  Not that common I don't think.

I think you need to find a way not to punish people that somehow found a way to do it the right way and get large sums in there, but I don't think it would frankly be that much money they'd collect.  I don't think it's a good idea to change the rules after the fact, I agree.  But change them going forward.

EDIT: Looked it up.  There are about 28,000 people with IRAs over $5 million.  More than I expected, but I wonder how many of those are people who saved it the way the system was intended (by working hard and saving as they go)? 

If we're talking purely IRAs then yes the biggest concern is just the slippery slope. But 401ks is where that slippery slope becomes a huge problem.

The United States has abysmal rates of saving for retirement and personal financial investing. To suddenly start stealing retirement money is a move in a really wrong direction.

No solid numbers were released on these proposals, but democrats are saying it could cut out a significant chunk of the 3.5 trillion in proposed deficit spending.  And I don't see how you can be more than a drop in the bucket without raping other retirement money
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 03, 2021, 06:41:08 PM
dcm is just regretting his decision to funnel all of his money he's ever made into retirement funds instead of going out and spending it on cold booze and hot women like we told him to, and justifying his error by being upset that Commie Joe is going to spend it all on horse drawn carriages for poor people.

Don't you worry ill be coming back to quote this post in 2062 with an I told you so that it was all worth it!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 03, 2021, 07:10:06 PM
Don't you worry ill be coming back to quote this post in 2062 with an I told you so that it was all worth it!

You're going to have a heart attack on a treadmill in 2038.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 03, 2021, 07:12:09 PM
Getting big "Dems want to raise your taxes to 90%" vibes from dcm's concern
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 03, 2021, 07:14:12 PM
If we're talking purely IRAs then yes the biggest concern is just the slippery slope. But 401ks is where that slippery slope becomes a huge problem.

The United States has abysmal rates of saving for retirement and personal financial investing. To suddenly start stealing retirement money is a move in a really wrong direction.

No solid numbers were released on these proposals, but democrats are saying it could cut out a significant chunk of the 3.5 trillion in proposed deficit spending.  And I don't see how you can be more than a drop in the bucket without raping other retirement money
I haven't seen any mention of 401Ks being targeted.  It's the Thiels of the world and the backdoor Roths that allow super rich people to avoid paying taxes. The tax savings of IRAs weren't intended for the ultra rich, they were an incentive for middle and lower class people to save for retirement.  I can't blame the rich for using the system to their advantage.  The system needs a tweak sometimes.

You mention the terrible savings rate of the average American.  I agree.  If they are shitty at saving, how would they be targeted in any of this?  They don't have any savings.  Who is mentioning stealing their money?  That's just scare tactics.  If they have enough to be targeted here, they aren't shitty at saving.

I think the Dems are overinflating what they can get from this.  I doubt anything will happen anyway.  It never does.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 03, 2021, 07:24:15 PM


I doubt anything will happen anyway.  It never does.

You could write speeches for Biden.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 03, 2021, 07:33:04 PM

You could write speeches for Biden.
Well, I'd be right a lot. 

"We'll push out this plan to Congress, but don't bother caring, it'll die there."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 03, 2021, 07:42:31 PM
Don't you worry ill be coming back to quote this post in 2062 with an I told you so that it was all worth it!

In 2062 I'll be lucky if I'm still drooling baby food down my wrinkly chest while my brain thinks unpleasant things about the nurse feeding it to me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 03, 2021, 08:28:35 PM
Well, I'd be right a lot. 

"We'll push out this plan to Congress, but don't bother caring, it'll die there."
Self-fulfilling when Biden says it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 03, 2021, 08:30:24 PM
In 2062 I'll be lucky if I'm still drooling baby food down my wrinkly chest while my brain thinks unpleasant things about the nurse feeding it to me.
JE 2062

https://twitter.com/alexsteinnn/status/1099076494687641600?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 03, 2021, 08:43:13 PM
Brown v. Turner (the 'leftier' Turner's outspent Brown by more than 2-to-1.
It's all about the benjamins

https://twitter.com/kirk_bado/status/1422733606217256963?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 03, 2021, 09:03:13 PM
You're going to have a heart attack on a treadmill in 2038.

Long as it's not an LAD I'm good to go
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 03, 2021, 09:09:58 PM
Getting big "Dems want to raise your taxes to 90%" vibes from dcm's concern

Nahh

I accept that tax hikes are an inevitably and that naturally America will move to the left, and things like UBI and universal Healthcare are a probablility if not certainty in my lifetime.

What I'm not okay with is someone changing the rules retroactively and literally stealing peoples money.

If they want to change 401ks IRAs whatever, you phase it in over time.

To suddenly say hey you did XYZ under the rules legally, but we want your money to fuel our agenda so we're just gonna steal it is a seriously fucked up thing.

I 100% agree that people should not be able to do what Peter Thiel did with his Roth IRA. That's why the rules should be changed going forward, not retroactively
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 03, 2021, 09:11:13 PM
Nahh

I accept that tax hikes are an inevitably and that naturally America will move to the left, and things like UBI and universal Healthcare are a probablility if not certainty in my lifetime.

Lol, fuckkk that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 03, 2021, 09:14:18 PM
Lol, fuckkk that.

I mean you know it's gonna happen, just look at the direction of the country the last 10 20 years.

Rather than be one of those crazy people who froths out the mouth listening to their favorite loonie toons, I just live my life and plan around it.

I will gladly retire in my 40s with a smile on my face if UBI and universal Healthcare become a reality in the next 15 years
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 04, 2021, 06:37:29 AM
I mean you know it's gonna happen, just look at the direction of the country the last 10 20 years.

Rather than be one of those crazy people who froths out the mouth listening to their favorite loonie toons, I just live my life and plan around it.

I will gladly retire in my 40s with a smile on my face if UBI and universal Healthcare become a reality in the next 15 years
Look at dcm making sense....
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 04, 2021, 07:35:56 AM
Look at dcm making sense....

Except there's no indication to think that's the case.

Just because deep blue enclaves elect exceedingly progressive politicians that spout these talking points doesn't mean we don't currently live in an incredibly divided country in terms of it almost being an even split in the House and Senate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 04, 2021, 08:11:33 AM
Credit where credit is due;

https://twitter.com/blmripac/status/1422635530982993926

Full disclosure, Lindsay Graham is a grifter/opportunist, but this is the right response.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 04, 2021, 09:25:20 AM
Credit where credit is due;

https://twitter.com/blmripac/status/1422635530982993926

Full disclosure, Lindsay Graham is a grifter/opportunist, but this is the right response.

From the psycho babe who gave us

"It's wrong to hope he dies from Covid, right?  Asking for a friend."
https://twitter.com/Blake_Filippi/status/1422528290380783657/photo/1

which followed "I'm not proud off my gut reaction which is 'I hope they all die'."
https://twitter.com/katecoynemccoy/status/1243687281531277317

Ms. Coyne McCoy's profile ("Meet Kate") includes in the very last sentence, pure comedy gold - https://campaignfixer.com:

" A trained mental health professional and therapist, Kate is adept at crisis management,"

https://campaignfixer.com  (registered lobbyist as well)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 04, 2021, 12:35:51 PM
From the psycho babe who gave us

"It's wrong to hope he dies from Covid, right?  Asking for a friend."
https://twitter.com/Blake_Filippi/status/1422528290380783657/photo/1

which followed "I'm not proud off my gut reaction which is 'I hope they all die'."
https://twitter.com/katecoynemccoy/status/1243687281531277317

Ms. Coyne McCoy's profile ("Meet Kate") includes in the very last sentence, pure comedy gold - https://campaignfixer.com:

" A trained mental health professional and therapist, Kate is adept at crisis management,"

https://campaignfixer.com  (registered lobbyist as well)

LOL what a fuckin psycho.

Speaking of psychos, Nina Turner's concession speech was certainly a doozy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 04, 2021, 01:11:48 PM
https://twitter.com/MikeMurphyForMN/status/1422914607459487746?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 04, 2021, 08:45:38 PM
Steve still serving up hot takes

https://twitter.com/SteveKingIA/status/1422219817252270082?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on August 04, 2021, 08:50:11 PM
Steve still serving up hot takes

https://twitter.com/SteveKingIA/status/1422219817252270082?s=19

That took a hard right turn.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 05, 2021, 10:21:11 AM
freak Steve King, but the idea that criticizing Soros is anti-semetic is absurd. It's the same logic that goes into people trying to promote the idea that criticizing the CCP fuels anti-asian hate in our country. It's total bullshit.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 05, 2021, 01:17:43 PM
X-post idiot rage

https://twitter.com/HenMazzig/status/1423314599504453637?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 06, 2021, 11:06:04 AM
Empty vessel Conor Lamb jumping into the senate race in PA. Hopefully he just splits centrists with Kenyatta and doesn't peel off too many salt of the earth types from Fetterman.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 07, 2021, 08:25:33 AM
The best cutoff placement I've seen in a while.

https://twitter.com/proustmalone/status/1423652553934483463?s=20 (https://twitter.com/proustmalone/status/1423652553934483463?s=20)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 07, 2021, 12:20:25 PM
Courage

https://twitter.com/DanRather/status/1423813462535196677

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/40/Fantasy_Worlds_of_Myth_and_Magic%2C_EMP%2C_Seattle_-_The_Wizard_of_Oz_%289482831637%29.jpg/180px-Fantasy_Worlds_of_Myth_and_Magic%2C_EMP%2C_Seattle_-_The_Wizard_of_Oz_%289482831637%29.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 08, 2021, 06:55:22 PM
https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1424490986256879626?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 10, 2021, 08:25:52 PM
This is exactly like

https://twitter.com/CawthornforNC/status/1425253812370083844?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 10, 2021, 08:29:02 PM
Can't say I've read the book nor have any intention of doing so

But this seems to get parroted more and more frequently

It's also interesting that this person would post it on Twitter knowing 99% of people on Twitter probably are not part of the demographic who would have read it

(probably 99.999% but I'm making a conservative guesstimate)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 10, 2021, 08:33:19 PM


Can't say I've read the book nor have any intention of doing so

But this seems to get parroted more and more frequently

It's also interesting that this person would post it on Twitter knowing 99% of people on Twitter probably are not part of the demographic who would have read it

(probably 99.999% but I'm making a conservative guesstimate)

Key word is parroted. It's a rallying cry for the "gubmint bad" dummies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 10, 2021, 08:35:46 PM

Key word is parroted. It's a rallying cry for the "gubmint bad" dummies.

Hopefully all the gubmint bad dummies go hang out with all the gubmint good dummies while forgetting their masks and solving a whole lot of problems
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 10, 2021, 08:44:21 PM
Hopefully all the gubmint bad dummies go hang out with all the gubmint good dummies while forgetting their masks and solving a whole lot of problems
It's almost like the state is a tool that's completely dependent on who is wielding it and what they're trying to accomplish.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 10, 2021, 08:55:04 PM
It's almost like the state is a tool that's completely dependent on who is wielding it and what they're trying to accomplish.

Wee-Bey.gif
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 10, 2021, 09:00:11 PM
It's almost like the state is a tool that's completely dependent on who is wielding it and what they're trying to accomplish.

I agree

And Trump and Biden have been the most powerful and important people in charge of that tool.

So how well do you think it's typically used?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 10, 2021, 09:15:13 PM
It's almost like the state is a tool that's completely dependent on who is wielding it and what they're trying to accomplish.

It's almost like 99 times out of 100 the State is a criminal enterprise because people are corrupt.

MurrayRothbard.gif
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 10, 2021, 10:01:12 PM
Can't say I've read the book nor have any intention of doing so

But this seems to get parroted more and more frequently

It's also interesting that this person would post it on Twitter knowing 99% of people on Twitter probably are not part of the demographic who would have read it

(probably 99.999% but I'm making a conservative guesstimate)
You should, it's a brilliant book. If you read it you'll understand when it being referenced is appropriate and when it isn't.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 10, 2021, 10:06:52 PM
You should, it's a brilliant book. If you read it you'll understand when it being referenced is appropriate and when it isn't.

Unfortunately my dumb derriere is going back to college for the umpteenth time

Reading for pleasure is going to take a back burner for a few years
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 12, 2021, 02:48:22 PM


You should, it's a brilliant book. If you read it you'll understand when it being referenced is appropriate and when it isn't.

If one believes all democrats are communists and all communists are authoritarian then it's always appropriate!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 12, 2021, 02:49:38 PM
If NYS loses a house seat it better not come at the expense of the metro NYC area.

https://twitter.com/Redistrict/status/1425904854661320705?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 13, 2021, 08:33:26 AM
Moderates making things worse as usual

https://twitter.com/LACaldwellDC/status/1426154067991187462?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 13, 2021, 08:55:44 AM
Moderates making things worse as usual

https://twitter.com/LACaldwellDC/status/1426154067991187462?s=19

Time for nine moderate House members to lose some key funding line items and have their bills stuck in committee.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 13, 2021, 09:22:32 AM
Time for nine moderate House members to lose some key funding line items and have their bills stuck in committee.

Or its time to recognize that the Democratic party has completely moved the goalposts to the point that they only have 9 principled members remaining who understand you can't just spend without proper funding.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 13, 2021, 10:09:54 AM
Or its time to recognize that the Democratic party has completely moved the goalposts to the point that they only have 9 principled members remaining who understand you can't just spend without proper funding.

You and Badger can argue about Modern Monetary Theory vs. trying to reduce the deficit.  I'm out on that one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 13, 2021, 10:18:24 AM
Or its time to recognize that the Democratic party has completely moved the goalposts to the point that they only have 9 principled members remaining who understand you can't just spend without proper funding.
Josh Gottheimer is a Clinton disciple and basically a corporate donor golem. He does not have a principled cell in his body.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 13, 2021, 10:21:46 AM
You and Badger can argue about Modern Monetary Theory vs. trying to reduce the deficit.  I'm out on that one.
Once you've heard of MMT it's too late - you can't un-notice they only cite cost as an obstacle for things they oppose. It's never a concern for the things they support.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 13, 2021, 10:30:19 AM
Josh Gottheimer is a Clinton disciple and basically a corporate donor golem. He does not have a principled cell in his body.

I don't disagree. So is David Brock, but that doesn't stop people from actually thinking Media Matters for America is some sort of principled journalistic entity.

Put it this way, I can find some (not all) of said "moderates" to be unadulterated pieces of excrement and not sing their praises while also simultaneously agreeing with a position they may take.

To your credit, you've done the same when it comes to The Lincoln Project and the like.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 15, 2021, 10:18:56 AM
It’s heartening to know that amidst the uncertainty in the world today that one can turn to Dan Rather for his comforting wisdom.  Thank you Mr. Rather.

Courage.

https://mobile.twitter.com/DanRather/status/1426693001733033987


edit: GFY you self-absorbed, pontificating poopchute. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 16, 2021, 11:21:59 AM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210816/55b1d1a66c773be144e8260e11e69c78.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 16, 2021, 07:34:31 PM
A+ pandering

https://twitter.com/SenTomCotton/status/1426162752469483531?s=19

https://twitter.com/deonteleologist/status/1427204329279156224?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 17, 2021, 01:28:54 PM
https://twitter.com/deonteleologist

https://twitter.com/deonteleologist/photo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 17, 2021, 03:28:58 PM
https://twitter.com/deonteleologist

https://twitter.com/deonteleologist/photo

Wapo really galling on tough times
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 17, 2021, 03:33:44 PM
A+ pandering

https://twitter.com/SenTomCotton/status/1426162752469483531?s=19

https://twitter.com/deonteleologist/status/1427204329279156224?s=19

Stupid take from Pompeo, but complete ad hominem attacks on Rufo with no basis in fact, as per usual. How tiresome. May as well be Joy Reid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 18, 2021, 12:28:22 PM
https://twitter.com/marktakano/status/1427698490315051018?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 18, 2021, 12:58:53 PM
https://twitter.com/marktakano/status/1427698490315051018?s=21
I'm hoping to have a zero day work week as soon as possible.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 18, 2021, 12:59:28 PM
I'm hoping to have a zero day work week as soon as possible.

You and me both.

How many private businesses already try to demand weekends out of their employees? Where is this gonna go?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 18, 2021, 01:35:52 PM
https://twitter.com/marktakano/status/1427698490315051018?s=21

Great idea.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 18, 2021, 02:38:52 PM
Magically saying the work week is 32 hours isn't going to make it happen.

This is something that would have to get phased in over like 10 years, and IMO is probably harder to make happen than Universal Healthcare.

Not to mention the optics of the biggest shortage of workers and suddenly you want to cut the supply or workers by presumably close to 20%

But to me this is pure political pandering on something that they know is 100% completely not feasible. And they just wanna fire up and excite all the kiddies who don't want to go to work
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 18, 2021, 04:19:38 PM
Magically saying the work week is 32 hours isn't going to make it happen.

This is something that would have to get phased in over like 10 years, and IMO is probably harder to make happen than Universal Healthcare.

Not to mention the optics of the biggest shortage of workers and suddenly you want to cut the supply or workers by presumably close to 20%

But to me this is pure political pandering on something that they know is 100% completely not feasible. And they just wanna fire up and excite all the kiddies who don't want to go to work
Keep it 40 hrs just four 10 hr days instead of five 8 hr days.  I've been doing it for 18 years.  I love having Mondays off.  Don't mind longer days.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 18, 2021, 04:54:35 PM
Keep it 40 hrs just four 10 hr days instead of five 8 hr days.  I've been doing it for 18 years.  I love having Mondays off.  Don't mind longer days.

Again, what's going to stop, say a law firm from demanding five days a week.

As it stands, I'm working 50 hours a week (M-F 10/hrs a pop) and that's considered light.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on August 18, 2021, 05:07:25 PM
Again, what's going to stop, say a law firm from demanding five days a week.

As it stands, I'm working 50 hours a week (M-F 10/hrs a pop) and that's considered light.
Fair point. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 18, 2021, 08:27:39 PM
Keep it 40 hrs just four 10 hr days instead of five 8 hr days.  I've been doing it for 18 years.  I love having Mondays off.  Don't mind longer days.

I mean sure I suppose this is feasible

But do we really need the government to change the law to change the workweek to 4 10 hour shifts?

Not to mention I don't know if you've looked around the country.

But the amount of 400 pound fuckers out there, and people working older and older because they don't save for retirement. How many Americans are out there that would severely struggle to work 10 hour days from a physical perspective alone? 2 hours doesn't seem like much but that's a 25% increase

And of course childcare is another huge issue that would come along with this
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: AlioTheFool on August 18, 2021, 08:40:10 PM
This is actually one thing I don't feel should, or even can be, legislated.

Americans work too much, but simply decreasing the "standard" number of hours per week leaves more questions than it answers. How do you force employers to keep everyone at the same weekly income putting in fewer hours? What about non-salaried workers who rely on OT to get by?

I'm fully in favor of flexible schedules for business/positions where it's feasible. I can do the vast majority of my job at any time of day or night and while remote, I work all kinds of hours. But this is something that is up to the individual business.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 18, 2021, 09:04:25 PM
This is actually one thing I don't feel should, or even can be, legislated.

Americans work too much, but simply decreasing the "standard" number of hours per week leaves more questions than it answers. How do you force employers to keep everyone at the same weekly income putting in fewer hours? What about non-salaried workers who rely on OT to get by?

I'm fully in favor of flexible schedules for business/positions where it's feasible. I can do the vast majority of my job at any time of day or night and while remote, I work all kinds of hours. But this is something that is up to the individual business.

 if anything they could slowly inch up the threshold of what constitutes overtime.

I mean right now the law states anything over 40 hours a week for not exempt employees is overtime.

You want to change how many hours a week the American works move the goalposts. Make it 36 hours a week then move it forward as needed.

Of course the obvious problem with this is employers will just make up this money elsewhere. And again still have the worker shortage so it's still not super feasible.

I still think the best way for the government to decrease the the work week in an indirect way, is simply universal Healthcare.

If people don't have to work 40 hours a week to get benefit I'd imagine you'd see a tremendous increase in part time and per diem employees
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 19, 2021, 05:53:52 PM
https://twitter.com/aobrien2010/status/1428050745367089159?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 19, 2021, 06:16:38 PM
https://twitter.com/aobrien2010/status/1428050745367089159?s=19

All attempts to introduce more Slayer to politics are to be encouraged.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 19, 2021, 07:02:09 PM
What kind of person votes for someone like this?

I understand polorization where you must defeat the other people by any means necessary

But how the freak are these people surviving the primaries?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 20, 2021, 02:49:43 PM
https://www.reuters.com/world/us/exclusive-fbi-finds-scant-evidence-us-capitol-attack-was-coordinated-sources-2021-08-20/

muh insurrection narrative BTFO.

The comparisons to freaking Pearl Harbor and 9/11 were and remain utterly revolting.

Reminder that one of you was freaking stupid enough to compare this to the freaking beer hall putsch. Obvious flaming hack retard is obvious.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 20, 2021, 09:20:34 PM
W... What

https://twitter.com/OccupyDemocrats/status/1428826842853560322?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on August 20, 2021, 09:34:26 PM
W... What

https://twitter.com/OccupyDemocrats/status/1428826842853560322?s=19

hmmm... should I post this?

Quote
BREAKING NEWS: The US Capitol Police officially exonerates the Capitol Officer who rightfully shot and killed Republican Ashli Babbitt as she tried to break in to the floor of Congress during Trump’s insurrection. RT IF YOU THINK THAT THIS IS GREAT NEWS!

...nah, too crazy and partisan, gotta fix it...

Quote
BREAKING NEWS: The US Capitol Police officially exonerates the Capitol Officer who rightfully shot and killed Republican hero Ashli Babbitt as she tried to break in to the floor of Congress during Trump’s insurrection. RT IF YOU THINK THAT THIS IS GREAT NEWS!

perfect!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 20, 2021, 09:41:33 PM
When do the USCP challenge coins come out?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 21, 2021, 01:46:39 AM
So liberals have finally come around to celebrating cops who kill people in the line of duty.

Glad to know they changed their minds about everything that happened the last two years
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 21, 2021, 06:25:08 AM
So liberals have finally come around to celebrating cops who kill people in the line of duty.

Glad to know they changed their minds about everything that happened the last two years
Scratch a liberal and a fascist bleeds
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 21, 2021, 08:14:15 AM
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-08-20/recall-candidate-larry-elder-is-a-threat-to-black-californians

What an absolutely revolting headline.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 24, 2021, 02:51:26 PM
I'm a little confused by this.

https://www.wesh.com/article/former-florida-state-senator-enters-guilty-plea-in-ghost-candidate-investigation/37384306

On the face of it it seems shady, but in reality what did he do wrong? Isn't the point of the process that anyone can stand as a candidate?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 24, 2021, 02:57:03 PM
I'm a little confused by this.

https://www.wesh.com/article/former-florida-state-senator-enters-guilty-plea-in-ghost-candidate-investigation/37384306

On the face of it it seems shady, but in reality what did he do wrong? Isn't the point of the process that anyone can stand as a candidate?

You're probably confused because journalistic standards are so freaking shitty that stuff like this gets published.

An article about a dude pleading guilty to election crimes. But never states what he actually plead guilty to
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 30, 2021, 01:32:16 PM
https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2021-08-20/recall-candidate-larry-elder-is-a-threat-to-black-californians

What an absolutely revolting headline.
Why?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 01, 2021, 09:17:11 AM
https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1432682606248747009
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 01, 2021, 12:14:46 PM
https://twitter.com/steve_vladeck/status/1432682606248747009

(https://media.giphy.com/media/3o6ZsVb2AVek5FA28U/giphy.gif?cid=ecf05e476hypxy33rybxbj8p05499f1xi54c2h8uintv2ccf&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 01, 2021, 04:28:19 PM
loljustice

https://twitter.com/NPR/status/1433167100600799237?t=MBRsgacqaYZmOeQLPHbOUw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 01, 2021, 04:49:31 PM
Why?

It plays on the usual, tired and frankly disgusting "Black conservatives are race traitors/Uncle Tom's" trope.

A horrible substitute for any sort of actual substantive argument.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 01, 2021, 04:54:03 PM
loljustice

https://twitter.com/NPR/status/1433167100600799237?t=MBRsgacqaYZmOeQLPHbOUw&s=19

This is America, nobody is supposed to pay their debts. Or even their rent
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 01, 2021, 04:58:43 PM
loljustice

https://twitter.com/NPR/status/1433167100600799237?t=MBRsgacqaYZmOeQLPHbOUw&s=19

To be fair, the judge doesn't sound too impressed. If I read it correctly, he was simply required to put a judicial rubber stamp on a negotiated agreement between parties. They've surrendered $4.3B and the company.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 01, 2021, 05:00:42 PM
This is America, nobody is supposed to pay their debts. Or even their rent
Imagine if you had politics more advanced than shitting on poor people

In b4 you try to invert that as a retort without realizing how dumb it sounds
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 01, 2021, 05:08:37 PM
Imagine if you had politics more advanced than shitting on poor people

In b4 you try to invert that as a retort without realizing how dumb it sounds

I just think it's ridiculous to always blame corporations and take no personal responsibility.

Should people sue every company that serves unhealthy addicting food because they're a bunch of fat fucks suffering from metabolic syndrome?

The biggest epidemic in the world by a huge huge margin is your metabolic syndrome stuff, yet instead were all obsessed with cops drugs and other bullshit. Literally nobody talks about any of that excrement ever. And the rare times it gets brought up, the issue is about how we're all a bunch of fat shaming bigots and that we should give everyone who can't find their dick under their gut a blowjob

Also in addition to the cash part of the settlement includes

Quote
The drugmaker itself will be reorganized into a new company with a board appointed by public officials and will funnel its profits into government-led efforts to prevent and treat addiction.

The settlement doesn't sound outrageously unfair. But hey I'll admit that we're both pretty freaking biased. I'll argue against literally anything ever in existence, and you seem to have pretty strong feelings in regards to wealthy corporations (or landlords)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 01, 2021, 07:03:50 PM


Should people sue every company that serves unhealthy addicting food because they're a bunch of fat fucks suffering from metabolic syndrome?

That depends, are the companies paying off doctors to tell people that the food in question is healthy?

For reference, I don't think gun manufacturers are responsible for mass shootings because the two situations aren't comparable.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 01, 2021, 07:25:14 PM

That depends, are the companies paying off doctors to tell people that the food in question is healthy?

Are they paying off doctors? No

Did they pay off the United States government to push out some bullshit biased food pyramid for decades and make it standard teaching across the country? Yes yes they did

So anyone who is obese has hypertension diabetes hyperlipidemia or anything else remotely even dietary linked should go out and sue the United States government until it's bankrupt and abolished.

Literally governmental corruption leading to greatest morbidity and mortaility of the United States populace in the history of this nation
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 02, 2021, 05:52:31 AM
The penalty for aborting after a rape in Texas is now more severe than committing rape in Texas.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 02, 2021, 09:24:04 AM
Sotomayor: “Presented with an application to enjoin a flagrantly unconstitutional law engineered to prohibit women from exercising their constitutional rights and evade judicial scrutiny, a majority of justices have opted to bury their heads in the sand.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 02, 2021, 10:19:56 AM
Are they paying off doctors? No

My bad, they paid pharma reps to lie to doctors. Totally different and cool.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 02, 2021, 10:26:30 AM
As for obesity, it seems like it's purely a thing you use as a cudgel to minimize other important issues and not something that you actually care or do anything about, so it's hard to take seriously.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 02, 2021, 10:46:00 AM
As for obesity, it seems like it's purely a thing you use as a cudgel to minimize other important issues and not something that you actually care or do anything about, so it's hard to take seriously.

My background is in cardiac surgery, and I used to be a fat freak (average American dude) when I was young.

Obesity is one of the things I hold my strongest views on.

Not to mention on a factual statistical basis obesity and metabolic syndrome related disease is consistently the biggest threat to man kind.

Hell men are literally losing their fertility because they're a bunch of overweight cucks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on September 02, 2021, 10:59:51 AM
My background is in cardiac surgery, and I used to be a fat freak (average American dude) when I was young.

Obesity is one of the things I hold my strongest views on.

Not to mention on a factual statistical basis obesity and metabolic syndrome related disease is consistently the biggest threat to man kind.

Hell men are literally losing their fertility because they're a bunch of overweight cucks.

This is what you end up with when you have 4 different tiers of Big Macs at your local McDonalds.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 02, 2021, 11:17:56 AM
This is what you end up with when you have 4 different tiers of Big Macs at your local McDonalds.
Poutine. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 02, 2021, 11:22:35 AM
This is what you end up with when you have 4 different tiers of Big Macs at your local McDonalds.
sToP bLaMiNg CoRpOrAtIoNs
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 03, 2021, 01:32:19 PM
https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1433859849977139201?s=19

Every day I understand better why Blue MAGA couldn't let go of imaginary solutions to Trump (faithless electors, Mueller, various "walls are closing in" scenarios), because when it comes to fighting anyone to their left they're able to just make up or change the rules on a whim
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 03, 2021, 08:08:00 PM
Mr. Too Damn Sensible

Imagine believing this guy as he invokes the deficit when he opposes things that would make him slightly less rich.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210904/58dd9811d28bf40cd3baa0438956ce8e.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 03, 2021, 09:01:31 PM
Mr. Too Damn Sensible

Imagine believing this guy as he invokes the deficit when he opposes things that would make him slightly less rich.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210904/58dd9811d28bf40cd3baa0438956ce8e.jpg)

The dude founded a company that makes 2.6 billion dollars in freaking revenue

The fact that he's made close to 5 million over like 11 years? Not so ridiculous

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 04, 2021, 10:25:22 AM
Just mister sensible regular Joe making decisions that are best for everyone and not seeking to keep himself and his children wealthy. Definitely not bullshitting everyone with with a moderate aesthetic to appeal to the smoothest of brains.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 04, 2021, 12:08:41 PM
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Rowdy_Raccoon_Radical_Cheerleaders.webm


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hu-8EhCO0co
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 07, 2021, 06:35:20 PM
It's just that simple

https://twitter.com/KXAN_News/status/1435294934555189258?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 07, 2021, 08:30:27 PM
It's just that simple

https://twitter.com/KXAN_News/status/1435294934555189258?s=19

https://twitter.com/DPRK_News/status/1435340868173586435?s=19 (https://twitter.com/DPRK_News/status/1435340868173586435?s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on September 07, 2021, 08:48:36 PM
It's just that simple

https://twitter.com/KXAN_News/status/1435294934555189258?s=19

Rapists hate him!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 08, 2021, 06:42:34 AM
“Let’s be clear: rape is a crime,” Abbott said. “And Texas will work tirelessly to make sure that we eliminate all rapists from the streets of Texas by aggressively going out and arresting them and prosecuting them and getting them off the streets.”

The social conservative understanding of rape is that it's only committed by roving gangs of "others" and that things like date rape or marital rape simply do not exist. About 2/3 of rapes are committed by someone the victim knows, but this clown is acting like there are cartoon villains waiting behind bushes to jump out and rape someone.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 08, 2021, 07:06:44 AM
Rapers

(https://thegirlwhoknewtoomuch46.files.wordpress.com/2016/07/tumblr_lldl4jvcze1qclvq3.gif?w=376)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 08, 2021, 12:34:33 PM
Hard to draw any conclusion other than Democrats hate wielding power

https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1435330778162937857?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 08, 2021, 03:54:57 PM
When will racist Democrats stop?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/larry-elder-attacked-egg-throwing-agitators-los-angeles
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 08, 2021, 03:59:04 PM
When will racist Democrats stop?

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/larry-elder-attacked-egg-throwing-agitators-los-angeles
WE'RE GETTING EGGED FROM BEHIND
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 09, 2021, 07:57:28 AM
"How can we do as little as possible for the lowest number of people?"

https://twitter.com/ryanobles/status/1435737334927044612?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 09, 2021, 12:22:43 PM
....BY A WHITE PERSON ATTACKING AN AFRICAN-AMERICAN WHILE DEPICTING THEMSELVES AS A PRIMATE?


   hello???
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 09, 2021, 12:24:00 PM
I'm upset at the waste of good eggs.  If they were fertilized somehow, that's $10K babby!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 09, 2021, 12:31:14 PM
I'm upset at the waste of good eggs.  If they were fertilized somehow, that's $10K babby!

How silly of me, it's a Black Republican so its okay!

I can only imagine how social media and the media at large would implode if this happened to say, Stacey Abrams.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 09, 2021, 12:39:01 PM
How silly of me, it's a Black Republican so its okay!

I can only imagine how social media and the media at large would implode if this happened to say, Stacey Abrams.

Candidate trying to become the first black governor of California attacked by white racist Karen wearing a gorilla mask caught committing hate crime on camera. White supremacy gone wild, America is racist, BLM riots to begin at 3pm
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 09, 2021, 12:46:48 PM
How silly of me, it's a Black Republican so its okay!

I can only imagine how social media and the media at large would implode if this happened to say, Stacey Abrams.
I'm not talking about the target, I'm talking about wasted eggs.  He could have dropped them for all I care.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 09, 2021, 01:03:40 PM
It's cute when conservatives try to hijack idpol like it's the reverse card in Uno
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 09, 2021, 01:16:33 PM
Quote from: bojanglesman
I'm not talking about the target, I'm talking about wasted eggs.  He could have dropped them for all I care.

...so a white person attacks an African-American while depicting themselves as AN AFRICAN PRIMATE and we're concerned with "omlets lost?" 

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c3/Gorilla_gorilla_skull.jpg/320px-Gorilla_gorilla_skull.jpg)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9e/Two_eggs.jpg/320px-Two_eggs.jpg)






 

 

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 09, 2021, 08:52:11 PM
Interrupting coverage of Larry Elder sort of almost nearly possibly being lynched for this important Kyrsten Sinema content

https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/1436122981990809600?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 09, 2021, 08:58:02 PM
It's cute when conservatives try to hijack idpol like it's the reverse card in Uno

It's actually unreal that a catholic school kid who did nothing wrong but wore a certain hat sent this place in a frenzy for about a day and a half (Sandmann 2040), while actual racist behavior gets met with a collective yawn.

If I didn't know any better I'd say there were people who actually just feign outrage as performative bullshit to complain while having absolutely no intention of living under the rules or standards they want to rigidly place on others.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 09, 2021, 09:29:06 PM
Interrupting coverage of Larry Elder sort of almost nearly possibly being lynched for this important Kyrsten Sinema content

https://twitter.com/JordanUhl/status/1436122981990809600?s=19

While airily smugly blithely insouciantly continuing to purposely ignore the '500 lb. gorilla' in the room.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Zbnvh6I4k4


 

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 09, 2021, 10:05:35 PM
It's actually unreal that a catholic school kid who did nothing wrong but wore a certain hat sent this place in a frenzy for about a day and a half (Sandmann 2040), while actual racist behavior gets met with a collective yawn.

If I didn't know any better I'd say there were people who actually just feign outrage as performative bullshit to complain while having absolutely no intention of living under the rules or standards they want to rigidly place on others.
While airily smugly blithely insouciantly continuing to purposely ignore the '500 lb. gorilla' in the room.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Zbnvh6I4k4
Keep squeezing this rock, I'm sure you're very close to a drop of water coming out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 09, 2021, 11:32:31 PM
This is substantially worse than egging politicians:

https://twitter.com/JoshMandelOhio/status/1436143658693185537?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 09, 2021, 11:38:08 PM
This is substantially worse than egging politicians:

https://twitter.com/JoshMandelOhio/status/1436143658693185537?s=19

The whole not my president schtict was started by the anti Bush crazies.

Sure the dude in charge is senile and has advanced dementia. But it's pretty revolting to see conservatives acting like Bush hating liberals.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on September 09, 2021, 11:41:34 PM
The whole not my president schtict was started by the anti Bush crazies.

Sure the dude in charge is senile and has advanced dementia. But it's pretty revolting to see conservatives acting like Bush hating liberals.
Yeah, I don't think that's really the takeaway here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 10, 2021, 12:04:03 AM
Keep squeezing this rock, I'm sure you're very close to a drop of water coming out.

You can continuing to project and deflect with the snide, heavy-handed insults but the fact remains that you've continued to conveniently dick-dance around around an unconscionable exhibition of racism.  Your double standard's duly noted. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on September 10, 2021, 12:23:01 AM
You can continuing to project and deflect with the snide, heavy-handed insults but the fact remains that you've continued to conveniently dick-dance around around an unconscionable exhibition of racism.  Your double standard's duly noted. 

Pretty sure Badger is very consistently ambivalent about 'unconscionable' protests against politicians that are in his view inconsequential because they don't actually do anything to address anything important. He was very similarly ambivalent about the Jan. 6th protests for example
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 10, 2021, 06:39:44 AM
I'm also not sure it was racially motivated. Will eat crow if it was.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 10, 2021, 08:09:01 AM
I'm also not sure it was racially motivated. Will eat crow if it was.

If there wasn't a racial motivation then the choice of mask was really poorly thought out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 10, 2021, 11:10:24 AM
If there wasn't a racial motivation then the choice of mask was really poorly thought out.
Yeah, I think it was just poor optics.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 10, 2021, 11:12:11 AM
Personally I don't think it was racially motivated, it just seems like a bunch of mentally ill homeless hippies who almost certainly severely abuse hard drugs.

But if the political ideologies were flipped, this would be front page news for the entire planet about how this was some Hitler KKK love child and a harbinger to the apocalypse
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 10, 2021, 05:32:23 PM
https://twitter.com/TheHyyyype/status/1436449572914700300?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 10, 2021, 07:03:43 PM
It is hard to imagine that somewhere around 600-800k abortions are performed in the United States every year. With how accessible forms of birth control are these days.

Unless that number includes mercy abortions (which I don't think it does) for babies that would be born with some major deformity.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 10, 2021, 07:04:38 PM
It is hard to imagine that somewhere around 600-800k abortions are performed in the United States every year. With how accessible forms of birth control are these days.

Unless that number includes mercy abortions (which I don't think it does) for babies that would be born with some major deformity.
Rape dude.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 10, 2021, 07:09:00 PM
Rape dude.

Aren't like 99% of abortions for things other than rape? And I'd imagine that many people would seek care after those situations even if they don't report the crime. To avoid disease pregnancy etc. Regardless the # of rapes per year is reporrdly close to 100,000 so I don't see that being a drop in the bucket

According to Google the abortion rate has only decreased by approximately 50% over the last 30 years. I'd imagine that number would be much much higher with advances in everything/access to everything.

I'm actually fairly progressive in the sense that I think abortions should be stupid easy/accessible for anyone to get. But you would think that the abortion rate would have decreased by so freaking much that this debate would disappear
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 10, 2021, 07:12:03 PM
Aren't like 99% of abortions for things other than rape? And I'd imagine that many people would seek care after those situations even if they don't report the crime. To avoid disease pregnancy etc

According to Google the abortion rate has only decreased by approximately 50% over the last 30 years. I'd imagine that number would be much much higher with advances in everything/access to everything.

I'm actually fairly progressive in the sense that I think abortions should be stupid easy/accessible for anyone to get. But you would think that the abortion rate would have decreased by so freaking much that this debate would disappear
Vast majority are probably horny/drunk mistakes. And a few random ricochet money shots.  Gun goes off sometimes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 10, 2021, 07:13:19 PM
I'm actually fairly progressive in the sense that I think abortions should be stupid easy/accessible for anyone to get. But you would think that the abortion rate would have decreased by so freaking much that this debate would disappear

In countries where sex education and contraception are ubiquitous, it has.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 10, 2021, 07:14:01 PM
Vast majority are probably horny/drunk mistakes. And a few random ricochet money shots.  Gun goes off sometimes.

I guess my point was how the freak did the number only decrease by 50% in 30 years
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 10, 2021, 07:16:49 PM
I guess my point was how the freak did the number only decrease by 50% in 30 years
We are stupid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 10, 2021, 07:19:58 PM
In countries where sex education and contraception are ubiquitous, it has.

The abortion rate of the United States vs say Canada France Sweden UK New Zealand isn't huge.

There's a difference for sure but it's something like 10-20%.

Meanwhile for example the abortion rate in the United States is something like 210 times higher than freaking Mexico.

Although I suppose that's probably because in Mexico you're more likely to get murdered and thrown into a ditch
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 10, 2021, 07:26:30 PM
We are stupid.

I guess when you look at the entire world being decimated by a disease for close to 2 years that would be basically be freaking eradicated if everyone just got a freaking shot.

Tells you all you need to know about how far society has to go
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 10, 2021, 07:47:56 PM
The abortion rate of the United States vs say Canada France Sweden UK New Zealand isn't huge.

There's a difference for sure but it's something like 10-20%.

Meanwhile for example the abortion rate in the United States is something like 210 times higher than freaking Mexico.

Although I suppose that's probably because in Mexico you're more likely to get murdered and thrown into a ditch

https://www.scidev.net/global/news/abortion-rates-highest-where-legally-restricted-study/

It's not really debatable, any more than giving people easy access to firearms results in more people being shot. I realise that the US loves itself a bit of exceptionalism, but at some point it might be healthier to just accept the data.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 10, 2021, 07:59:56 PM
I'm not debating it, the numbers are what they are and the United States is definitely higher than the vast majority of those countries you mentioned

But here are numbers that are a little more palatable

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/abortion-rates-by-country

What I was saying the education stuff wasn't a complete and utter game changer. Yes those countries tend to be 10-20% lower on average.

But even if the United States rate decreased by 20% it would still be outrageously high
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 10, 2021, 08:03:40 PM
Posting this, the latest version of MBC, for future reference when anyone starts whining about "yeah but the source".

(https://i.imgur.com/wVVljEy.png)

For the record I fundamentally disagree with the Daily Mail's positioning.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on September 10, 2021, 08:32:38 PM
Posting this, the latest version of MBC, for future reference when anyone starts whining about "yeah but the source".

(https://i.imgur.com/wVVljEy.png)

For the record I fundamentally disagree with the Daily Mail's positioning.

What we need is a Media Bias Chart Bias Chart.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 10, 2021, 10:34:00 PM
Posting this, the latest version of MBC, for future reference when anyone starts whining about "yeah but the source".

(https://i.imgur.com/wVVljEy.png)

For the record I fundamentally disagree with the Daily Mail's positioning.
What we need is a Media Bias Chart Bias Chart.
This is actually worse than some prior versions I've seen.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 11, 2021, 12:01:02 PM
Posting this, the latest version of MBC, for future reference when anyone starts whining about "yeah but the source".

(https://i.imgur.com/wVVljEy.png)

For the record I fundamentally disagree with the Daily Mail's positioning.

LOL that chart is a joke.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 11, 2021, 12:11:21 PM
LOL that chart is a joke.
Jimmy Dore: the leftest leftist
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 11, 2021, 03:16:34 PM
Apparently propublica and all of Europe are as middle leaning as you can get
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 11, 2021, 09:03:16 PM
Apparently propublica and all of Europe are as middle leaning as you can get
Pro Publica deserves its spot in the top section.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 14, 2021, 06:43:38 AM
https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1437597398478598147?s=19 (https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1437597398478598147?s=19)

Seems like this is going to be the playbook for a while.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 14, 2021, 07:13:36 AM
https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1437597398478598147?s=19 (https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1437597398478598147?s=19)

Seems like this is going to be the playbook for a while.

Yeah ever since Al Gore started with the baseless claims of election fraud, we have never heard the end of it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 14, 2021, 07:20:08 AM
Yeah ever since Al Gore started with the baseless claims of election fraud, we have never heard the end of it
Jesus....
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 14, 2021, 07:43:44 AM
Pro Publica deserves its spot in the top section.

Lol, no it doesn't.

https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1437597398478598147?s=19 (https://twitter.com/ddale8/status/1437597398478598147?s=19)

Seems like this is going to be the playbook for a while.

Daniel Dale continues to be a propagandist scumbag piece of excrement.

Yeah ever since Al Gore started with the baseless claims of election fraud, we have never heard the end of it

It's like everyone forgot the aftermath of 2016 and two plus year investigation of MuH rUsSiA as if that isn't a baseless claim of election fraud.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 14, 2021, 08:07:21 AM

Daniel Dale continues to be a propagandist scumbag piece of excrement.


What did he say that was incorrect here?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 14, 2021, 08:13:15 AM
What did he say that was incorrect here?

The entire "article" is dripping with unobjective horseshit, as per usual. I'll give him credit, he's good at the spin. That's how you can say Joe Biden is "imperfect from a fact checking perspective" (freaking lol) while calling everyone else who happens  to be right of center serial liars in the era of ThE BiG LiE.

That's without getting into the fact that people in Woodland Hills were told their vote was already registered without them actually voting. Want to guess what their party registration was? Big shock.

Remember, if Larry Elder or any other prominent conservative questions they process, they're lying liars in the era of the big lie. "Governor" Stacy Abrams? YASSS QUEEN EXPOSE THE FRAUD, EXPOSE THE SYSTEM.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 14, 2021, 08:13:55 AM


Lol, no it doesn't.

My bad they don't have any MyPillow ads, huge red flag for librul bias
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 14, 2021, 08:21:30 AM
The entire "article" is dripping with unobjective horseshit, as per usual. I'll give him credit, he's good at the spin. That's how you can say Joe Biden is "imperfect from a fact checking perspective" (freaking lol) while calling everyone else who happens  to be right of center serial liars in the era of ThE BiG LiE.

That's without getting into the fact that people in Woodland Hills were told their vote was already registered without them actually voting. Want to guess what their party registration was? Big shock.

Remember, if Larry Elder or any other prominent conservative questions they process, they're lying liars in the era of the big lie. "Governor" Stacy Abrams? YASSS QUEEN EXPOSE THE FRAUD, EXPOSE THE SYSTEM.

https://www.nbclosangeles.com/news/local/woodland-hills-voters-experience-glitch-at-check-in-just-days-ahead-of-election-day/2690548/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 14, 2021, 08:22:47 AM

My bad they don't have any MyPillow ads, huge red flag for librul bias

Ah yes, "mypillow" ads.

You take stock in CNN so I mean whatever.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 14, 2021, 10:08:55 AM
Ah yes, "mypillow" ads.

You take stock in CNN so I mean whatever.
If by that you mean I can discern fact vs opinion in any source, sure, I can use CNN
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 15, 2021, 12:04:36 AM
California recall effort fails by a mile as it rightly should. Guess Newsom really rigged it hard.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 15, 2021, 05:33:58 AM
California recall effort fails by a mile as it rightly should. Guess Newsom really rigged it hard.
Wow, racism wins again
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 15, 2021, 07:35:55 AM
California recall effort fails by a mile as it rightly should. Guess Newsom really rigged it hard.

White supremacy in action.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 15, 2021, 08:00:46 AM
White supremacy in action.
I guess Californians were just really uncomfortable with the idea of paying reparations to the real victims of slavery.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 15, 2021, 02:40:07 PM
Ah yes, "mypillow" ads.

You take stock in CNN so I mean whatever.
(https://preview.redd.it/eoi2rodrvmn71.png?width=972&format=png&auto=webp&s=fadb5ba1a17835b342ef0f4dcfb12b83fdc3db57)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 15, 2021, 06:07:37 PM
California recall effort fails by a mile as it rightly should.

Guess Newsom really rigged it hard.

Recalls (even the idea of a recall) are a dangerous example of "torch 'n pitchfork" populism run amok which holds that public passions are self-ratifying and should be implemented post haste as policy which contradicts the American political institution of 'representation' which in its essence holds that we do not pull the trigger on issues, decisions or policies ourselves so much as we elect those who do.  Recalls plain and simple are a bastardization of this institution and at the risk of sounding melodramatic have hints/notes of 'coup'...



Quote
...rigged it hard......racism wins again..........white supremacy in action......reparations....
   ...no interest addressing the partisan bickering...dross...     
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 15, 2021, 08:28:00 PM
Lots of people are saying this!

https://twitter.com/JasonSCampbell/status/1438183743433420800?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 15, 2021, 08:34:16 PM
Lots of people are saying this!

https://twitter.com/JasonSCampbell/status/1438183743433420800?s=19

That guy would definitely like Volbeat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 15, 2021, 08:45:18 PM
That guy would definitely like Volbeat.
It's too bad Obama banned Volbeat in 2013
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 15, 2021, 08:51:05 PM
Far more important than that video was one of the related videos explaining that Mark Milleys greatest accomplishment in life was eating 4 pizzas from dominos
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 15, 2021, 08:54:18 PM
It's too bad Obama banned Volbeat in 2013

If he had it would have cemented his status as the greatest President in US history.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on September 15, 2021, 09:10:22 PM
If he had it would have cemented his status as the greatest President in US history.

Grover Cleveland would like a word with you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 15, 2021, 09:11:43 PM
If he had it would have cemented his status as the greatest President in US history.

Be hard to be the greatest president in history when he set things up for Trump and Biden to both get elected.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 15, 2021, 09:13:10 PM
Be hard to be the greatest president in history when he set things up for Trump and Biden to both get elected.

Spoken like someone who has never had to listen to Volbeat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 15, 2021, 09:20:26 PM
Spoken like someone who has never had to listen to Volbeat.

Who listens to "rock" bands that formed in the 2000s?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 15, 2021, 09:28:31 PM
Who listens to "rock" bands that formed in the 2000s?

I'm not sure if this is a dad take or a kiddy take. Either way it's wrong.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 15, 2021, 09:31:04 PM
I'm not sure if this is a dad take or a kiddy take. Either way it's wrong.

Sounds better than being someone who listens to Volbeat
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 15, 2021, 09:35:59 PM
Sounds better than being someone who listens to Volbeat

Congratulations, you're learning.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 15, 2021, 10:13:56 PM
Grover Cleveland would like a word with you.

  Did you mean Grover Cleveland Alexander? 

  (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/08/Poster_-_Winning_Team%2C_The_01.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 15, 2021, 10:25:28 PM
Far more important than that video was one of the related videos explaining that Mark Milleys greatest accomplishment in life was eating 4 pizzas from dominos

hey budinsky, don't interrupt the volbeat tęte-ŕ-tęte

volbeat fyi's a lame Dane metal launched by a cheesy cover of a 'Dusty' Brit hit from the 60's - cornball elvis metal that's anathema to the terminally hip

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kWHPPMcHoLk


 

   
 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 16, 2021, 09:37:40 AM
I hate to interrupt the Volbeat discussion, but a sitting general discussing possible military engagements through back channels with our biggest geopolitical foe is sort of proof positive that the deep state exists.

Anyway, anyone got a spare 10k? I'll gladly show up to the tailgate for the Titans game in a 'tax the rich' dress (made of course by a designer who's dating a literal multimillionaire descendent of a Lehman Brothers executive.)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 16, 2021, 04:19:59 PM
Hillary Clinton lawyer indicted

https://www.npr.org/2021/09/16/1038035231/the-trump-russia-probe-special-counsel-has-charged-a-lawyer-with-lying-to-the-fb
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 16, 2021, 04:21:26 PM
Seems like a scumbag.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2021, 04:22:49 PM
The boogeymen get funnier and funnier

Quote
Tim James, who barely missed a runoff in the Alabama governor’s race in 2010, said today he is considering running for the office again and will make a decision by the end of the year.

James, 59, the son of two-time Alabama governor Fob James, raised expectations that he would make the announcement today when he called a press conference at the Capitol.

But James said the purpose of today’s event was to take a stand against what he said were threats to indoctrinate Alabama schoolchildren through critical race theory, transgender acceptance, and yoga, which he said are like “a beast with three heads” and violate Judeo-Christian principles.

https://www.al.com/news/2021/09/tim-james-teases-run-for-alabama-governor-lashes-out-over-critical-race-theory-transgenderism-yoga.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2021, 04:25:28 PM
Avocados are making our children socialist, vote for me
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 16, 2021, 04:26:26 PM
The boogeymen get funnier and funnier

https://www.al.com/news/2021/09/tim-james-teases-run-for-alabama-governor-lashes-out-over-critical-race-theory-transgenderism-yoga.html

Finally a Republican complaint I can get behind. The stretching stuff is fine, but all that namaste meditation bullshit they insist on weaving into it is the world's most irritating thing. Shut the freak up and tell me what stretches to do you stupid woman.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2021, 04:31:09 PM
I'm running for governor because fidget spinners have Chinese sex-trafficking microchips in them
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 16, 2021, 04:36:29 PM
Fob James

Like the thing I unlock my car with?



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2021, 04:37:11 PM
Like the thing I unlock my car with?
Key fobs are making our children trans
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 16, 2021, 04:37:20 PM
Finally a Republican complaint I can get behind. The stretching stuff is fine, but all that namaste meditation bullshit they insist on weaving into it is the world's most irritating thing. Shut the freak up and tell me what stretches to do you stupid woman.

90% of the greatness of yoga is the pants on about 0.09% of women who wear them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 16, 2021, 04:38:03 PM
Key fobs are making our children trans

I heard the deep state was making fidget spinner fobs.  Double woke!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2021, 04:38:07 PM
90% of the greatness of yoga is the pants on about 0.09% of women who wear them.
You're gonna have to explain this because he thinks pajama pants are yoga pants.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2021, 04:38:56 PM
I heard the deep state was making fidget spinner fobs.  Double woke!
Netflix is sneaking Mexican propaganda into Pokemon
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 16, 2021, 04:40:04 PM
You're gonna have to explain this because he thinks pajama pants are yoga pants.

pyjamas
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 16, 2021, 04:41:18 PM
You're gonna have to explain this because he thinks pajama pants are yoga pants.

It's funny because out of you, Bo, MB, Heis, SFD and me, I'm pretty sure I know who has by far been to the most yoga classes. And I can tell you that tight pants on tight butts is almost exclusively the preserve of sweaty adolescent fantasies - sweatpants or baggy shorts are the most common outfit in most yoga classes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 16, 2021, 04:41:58 PM
Netflix is sneaking Mexican propaganda into Pokemon

(https://i.gifer.com/GZbn.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2021, 04:42:27 PM
It's funny because out of you, Bo, MB, Heis, SFD and me, I'm pretty sure I know who has by far been to the most yoga classes. And I can tell you that tight pants on tight butts is almost exclusively the preserve of sweaty adolescent fantasies - sweatpants or baggy shorts are the most common outfit in most yoga classes.
Maybe up in Moosetoopia
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 16, 2021, 04:44:18 PM
It's funny because out of you, Bo, MB, Heis, SFD and me, I'm pretty sure I know who has by far been to the most yoga classes. And I can tell you that tight pants on tight butts is almost exclusively the preserve of sweaty adolescent fantasies - sweatpants or baggy shorts are the most common outfit in most yoga classes.

JE....ruining dreams since 2004.

I did a youtube yoga class for 30 days.  Cram it up your cramhole LaFleur!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2021, 04:47:31 PM
Quote
School officials say critical race theory is not taught in K-12 schools in Alabama. In August, the state Board of Education adopted a resolution aimed at banning CRT after discussion of the concept because a hot political topic. James said the theory remains a threat.

Well obviously, because the threat has no basis in reality. So it always looms, no matter what's actually being taught in schools.

Quote
“Those advocating this theory will not give up. We must continue to be vigilant in resisting CRT when we see it in any form,” James said.

CRT notoriously takes the form of anything you don't like!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 16, 2021, 05:17:44 PM
Hillary Clinton lawyer indicted

https://www.npr.org/2021/09/16/1038035231/the-trump-russia-probe-special-counsel-has-charged-a-lawyer-with-lying-to-the-fb

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2021, 07:12:48 PM
Free gun sweepstakes

https://action.greene2020.com/50-cal-gg/

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 16, 2021, 07:19:22 PM
Free gun sweepstakes

https://action.greene2020.com/50-cal-gg/

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

One measly stinking gun?  Why stop there?...

https://gununiversity.com/guns-and-gear-giveaways/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 16, 2021, 09:14:47 PM
One measly stinking gun?  Why stop there?...

https://gununiversity.com/guns-and-gear-giveaways/
None of those guns smell like Marj though.

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 17, 2021, 09:16:08 AM
Can't have drone footage to show how bad the border crisis is if you ban drones from flying in the area!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 17, 2021, 11:09:32 AM
None of those guns smell like Marj though.

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk



NGL, this might be the most off-putting post of yours that I ever read.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 17, 2021, 11:25:16 AM
NGL, this might be the most off-putting post of yours that I ever read.
I'm just getting better with age.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 17, 2021, 12:26:32 PM
Can't have drone footage to show how bad the border crisis is if you ban drones from flying in the area!
What the hell crisis are you talking about??
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/87/2008-11-10_Borders_in_Chapel_Hill.jpg/320px-2008-11-10_Borders_in_Chapel_Hill.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 19, 2021, 07:55:43 PM
Breaking: Dems still pretending the Senate Parliamentarian matters as an excuse to not actually enact their agenda
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 20, 2021, 10:50:50 AM
Breaking: Dems still pretending the Senate Parliamentarian matters as an excuse to not actually enact their agenda

https://twitter.com/IlhanMN/status/1439753403475836929

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 20, 2021, 10:54:36 AM
Faking:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f0/Del_Rio%2C_Texas_welcome_sign.JPG/640px-Del_Rio%2C_Texas_welcome_sign.JPG)

Suddenly, when it involves Haitians these two-faced clowns do a 180.  Racists fucks.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 20, 2021, 11:05:23 AM
https://twitter.com/oglakyn/status/1439768145951006720?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 20, 2021, 12:28:05 PM
https://twitter.com/oglakyn/status/1439768145951006720?s=21

   tax the rich
   c Y a
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 21, 2021, 08:48:05 PM
Thoughts and prayers to all the victims of this made up disease

https://twitter.com/MarkWarner/status/1440448354417139714?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on September 21, 2021, 09:08:56 PM
Thoughts and prayers to all the victims of this made up disease

https://twitter.com/MarkWarner/status/1440448354417139714?s=19

Is it?  This is the first I've heard of it.  Sounds like some James Bond excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 21, 2021, 09:39:55 PM
Thoughts and prayers to all the victims of this made up disease

https://twitter.com/MarkWarner/status/1440448354417139714?s=19

Closest thing that could be real: it's a more advanced directional sonic or microwave weapon designed for crowd control that can disrupt biological functions except now it works long term somehow

Most likely thing: I got hit with the real version of above and now I want disability
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 22, 2021, 06:08:05 AM
My wife claimed she had Havana Disease when I farted in her general direction.  My farts can cook a burrito in 30 seconds.  Bleedat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 22, 2021, 10:31:46 AM
My wife claimed she had Havana Disease when I farted in her general direction.  My farts can cook a burrito in 30 seconds.  Bleedat.
"What? It wasn't me honey, it was the communists."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 22, 2021, 11:39:11 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/2021/09/21/what-is-havana-syndrome-us-cuba-cia-burns/

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a9/Crisis_response_worker.svg/202px-Crisis_response_worker.svg.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 22, 2021, 01:39:12 PM
Drag their asses

https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1440733232543141891?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 22, 2021, 06:59:32 PM
As usual, everyone who think Omar is antisemitic is deeply unserious

https://twitter.com/Mediaite/status/1440747440617889793?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 22, 2021, 07:25:09 PM
As usual, everyone who think Omar is antisemitic is deeply unserious

https://twitter.com/Mediaite/status/1440747440617889793?s=19

She did win antisemite of the year in 2019.

Considering the threshold for calling other people whatever kind of bigot, it's perfectly reasonable to call her one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 22, 2021, 08:34:00 PM
She did win antisemite of the year in 2019.

Considering the threshold for calling other people whatever kind of bigot, it's perfectly reasonable to call her one.
Wow, this post is the most antisemitic thing I've ever read.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 22, 2021, 08:49:21 PM
Wow, this post is the most antisemitic thing I've ever read.

Not after you read this it won't be

https://www.amazon.com/This-What-America-Looks-Like/dp/0062954210
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 22, 2021, 09:02:15 PM
Not after you read this it won't be

https://www.amazon.com/This-What-America-Looks-Like/dp/0062954210
We've named you 2021 Antisemite of the Year, collect your award at the tailgate
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on September 23, 2021, 03:42:11 AM
(https://preview.redd.it/ypcl0vg7w6p71.jpg?width=640&height=409&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=9a873b2f5bb20ca9e93536c5d56b22ec0c56f909)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 23, 2021, 09:07:16 AM
https://twitter.com/ryankibby/status/1440451978358788106?s=21
https://twitter.com/jayweixelbaum/status/1440466730086658051?s=21

lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 23, 2021, 09:13:48 AM
https://twitter.com/ryankibby/status/1440451978358788106?s=21
https://twitter.com/jayweixelbaum/status/1440466730086658051?s=21

lol

First tweet: "Lt. Gov Mack Miller (NV)"

Whereas in fact: "Miller ran unsuccessfully as a Republican for the Nevada state assembly in 2018 and for mayor of Las Vegas in 2019. He is running for lieutenant governor next year, according to his campaign website."

https://www.newsweek.com/mack-miller-nevada-covid-meeting-thrown-out-1631506
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 23, 2021, 11:22:16 AM
(https://preview.redd.it/ypcl0vg7w6p71.jpg?width=640&height=409&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=9a873b2f5bb20ca9e93536c5d56b22ec0c56f909)

I thought this was just some internet meme and I'm still a little stunned after realising she actually did this in the House.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 24, 2021, 08:34:10 AM
Another Cuomo, another queynte

https://www.news.yahoo.com/cnns-chris-cuomo-accused-sexual-111236021.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 24, 2021, 08:50:16 AM
Another Cuomo, another queynte

https://www.google.com/amp/s/news.yahoo.com/amphtml/cnns-chris-cuomo-accused-sexual-111236021.html

What did you do to the link? My browser keeps trying to download something.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 24, 2021, 08:58:07 AM
What did you do to the link? My browser keeps trying to download something.

Uhm I copy and pasted it? lol

Here's the same link not from chrome (and not an amp)

https://nypost.com/2021/09/24/chris-cuomo-accused-of-sexually-harassing-ex-boss-at-2005-party/

(actually it's not the same link. But it's the same story. This AMP conspiracy theory is annoying)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 24, 2021, 11:25:58 AM
Uhm I copy and pasted it? lol

Here's the same link not from chrome (and not an amp)

https://nypost.com/2021/09/24/chris-cuomo-accused-of-sexually-harassing-ex-boss-at-2005-party/

(actually it's not the same link. But it's the same story. This AMP conspiracy theory is annoying)

It isn't a conspiracy theory, it's basic understanding of how technology works.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 27, 2021, 08:46:56 AM
And then,   she wept...

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-apologizes-after-tearful-present-vote-on-israel-iron-dome-funding-bill/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on September 27, 2021, 11:57:31 AM
And then,   she wept...

https://www.seattletimes.com/nation-world/alexandria-ocasio-cortez-apologizes-after-tearful-present-vote-on-israel-iron-dome-funding-bill/

And if she voted 'no' she'd be labeled an anti-semite for an inconsequential, symbolic show of resistance. The weight of AIPAC is absurd.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 27, 2021, 05:15:56 PM
And if she voted 'no' she'd be labeled an anti-semite for an inconsequential, symbolic show of resistance. The weight of AIPAC is absurd.

She could've voted either way for all I care.  I was   (per the 'pregnant pause' spacing in my post)   remarking on the distraught damsel's tears - amusing 'optics' both literally and figuratively, i.e. boo-hoo meets haha

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sBpm8tITIiE
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 29, 2021, 04:07:40 PM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210929/38ceb6516abddf8b6c068bcefe4f3c62.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 29, 2021, 04:23:57 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20210929/38ceb6516abddf8b6c068bcefe4f3c62.jpg)

Maybe there was concerns about the math the progressives were doing.

After all they have been proudly touting that the 3.5 trillion dollar bill will cost zero
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 29, 2021, 04:42:48 PM
Maybe there was concerns about the math the progressives were doing.

After all they have been proudly touting that the 3.5 trillion dollar bill will cost zero
Why are you so gullible
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 29, 2021, 04:45:08 PM
Why are you so gullible

Don't worry I didn't believe them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 29, 2021, 04:51:05 PM
Corporate dems are sabotaging legislation because they're paid to. This is an empirical fact. It's sad that you believe Joe Manchin when he says we can't afford things we desperately need to survive the century.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 29, 2021, 05:04:08 PM
Corporate dems are sabotaging legislation because they're paid to. This is an empirical fact. It's sad that you believe Joe Manchin when he says we can't afford things we desperately need to survive the century.

But I'm gullible
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 29, 2021, 06:15:21 PM
Neither bill will get passed anytime soon, if at all.  I holdout a tiny bit of confidence they will somehow manage to raise the debt ceiling.

I certainly feel that the first infrastructure bill needs to pass.  I think a large part of the reconciliation bill needs to be done.  I'm not a fan of free community college for all.  I think the other parts are way more important. 

I wish there was a way to do all this without massive wastage and stupid allocation of funds that comes along with government programs.  I especially expect extra retardation with the climate change part.  We desperately need to attack that problem, but we will just throw a bunch of cash at it and watch it end up in rich people's pockets.  The problem will be the execution, not the intention.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 29, 2021, 09:08:08 PM
My office started planning for the shutdown this morning.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 30, 2021, 07:18:37 AM
What a cool moderate guy, just crusading for fiscal responsibility

https://twitter.com/frankthorp/status/1443304382322384898?s=19

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 30, 2021, 07:24:10 AM


Neither bill will get passed anytime soon, if at all.  I holdout a tiny bit of confidence they will somehow manage to raise the debt ceiling.

I certainly feel that the first infrastructure bill needs to pass.  I think a large part of the reconciliation bill needs to be done.  I'm not a fan of free community college for all.  I think the other parts are way more important. 

I wish there was a way to do all this without massive wastage and stupid allocation of funds that comes along with government programs.  I especially expect extra retardation with the climate change part.  We desperately need to attack that problem, but we will just throw a bunch of cash at it and watch it end up in rich people's pockets.  The problem will be the execution, not the intention.

The two scumbags holding it up keep citing the price tag because being specific about which parts they'd cut would be politically unpopular. The infrastructure bill has already been hacked and slashed, Manchin lied and said he was on board with $4T, then changed his mind when $3.5T came anywhere close to passing. Focus needs to remain on who's freaking this up.

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 30, 2021, 07:25:03 AM
My office started planning for the shutdown this morning.
Are you all essential personnel?

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 30, 2021, 08:31:14 AM
Are you all essential personnel?

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk



Military, yes. The civilians in the building (my director included) are not. Looks like we're getting a CR to keep it funded as is through December, but good on them to wait until two days before a possible shutdown to have an organization wide discussion on any type of plan.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 30, 2021, 08:32:18 AM

The two scumbags holding it up keep citing the price tag because being specific about which parts they'd cut would be politically unpopular. The infrastructure bill has already been hacked and slashed, Manchin lied and said he was on board with $4T, then changed his mind when $3.5T came anywhere close to passing. Focus needs to remain on who's freaking this up.

Sent from my LM-G710VM using Tapatalk



I'd start with cutting West Virginia's highway funding. No need to build any more 4 lane roads leading to nowhere at 65 mph.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 30, 2021, 09:13:20 AM
Military, yes. The civilians in the building (my director included) are not. Looks like we're getting a CR to keep it funded as is through December, but good on them to wait until two days before a possible shutdown to have an organization wide discussion on any type of plan.
Hey that's the new normal. Better than a shutdown. I'm fortunate that I haven't worked through one long enough to delay my check (I'm essential so no furlough).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 30, 2021, 10:54:55 AM
I'm gonna have a stroke

https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1443549488447205378?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 30, 2021, 01:03:47 PM
Senate approved a temporary CR, sent it to the house.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 30, 2021, 04:53:11 PM
Senate approved a temporary CR, sent it to the house.
CR passed, through 12/3
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 30, 2021, 04:53:32 PM
A break from all the awful budget talk:

https://twitter.com/morroweric/status/1443628623576109065?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 30, 2021, 08:08:30 PM
CR passed, through 12/3

Yes. I have dodged having actual responsibility for another few months.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 01, 2021, 09:08:22 AM
https://twitter.com/nancytracker/status/1443705698534268933?s=21

Lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 01, 2021, 11:52:43 AM
Today is a good day to look up Steven Donziger if you want to be angry about corruption and the US justice system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 01, 2021, 04:16:41 PM
Squad's daily double game plan - TBD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALyrLFJjlE





 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 01, 2021, 05:00:11 PM
Squad's daily double game plan - TBD

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iALyrLFJjlE
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211001/c3f5e29ae3b7707485c312b624b66183.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 02, 2021, 08:57:50 AM
Possibly the funniest of the old Sinema tweets they've dug up

https://twitter.com/kyrstensinema/status/573257863730241536?t=M34MNtzps26TUl1Hw3x-Ag&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 02, 2021, 04:35:55 PM
Possibly the funniest of the old Sinema tweets they've dug up

https://twitter.com/kyrstensinema/status/573257863730241536?t=M34MNtzps26TUl1Hw3x-Ag&s=19

Do you legitimately think that tweet is that interesting?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 04, 2021, 01:46:07 PM
https://twitter.com/writhing_south/status/1445067928030916618?t=oESemghtryXNdH9J02liyA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 04, 2021, 02:04:18 PM
https://twitter.com/writhing_south/status/1445067928030916618?t=oESemghtryXNdH9J02liyA&s=19
Pwned
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 04, 2021, 03:31:26 PM
I too, would like to follow Sinema into a bathroom...


...blelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelele
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 04, 2021, 04:14:01 PM
I too, would like to follow Sinema into a bathroom...


...blelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelele
You align with closet fascists? 
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1444799807332265988

Me, I'd follow her into a bedroom...

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 04, 2021, 04:19:42 PM
You align with closet fascists? 
https://twitter.com/JackPosobiec/status/1444799807332265988

Me, I'd follow her into a bedroom...



Funny thing is there's probably millions of people who think this person is a hero.

And who the freak chants a Biden phrase?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 04, 2021, 04:35:00 PM
Funny thing is there's probably millions of people who think this person is a hero.

And who the freak chants a Biden phrase?
I don't throw around words like hero but people like Sinema 100% deserve worse than this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 04, 2021, 04:40:11 PM
I don't throw around words like hero but people like Sinema 100% deserve worse than this.

Lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 04, 2021, 04:54:57 PM
I don't throw around words like hero but people like Sinema 100% deserve worse than this.

You're a smart guy

You should be able to figure out why this is horrible and repugnant.

It's not like she was extorting money from baby orphans to run a prostitution ring.

She's doing what her job was and forming her own opinion and not following the herd. Not to mention she's not bending over to outside pressure telling her what the freak to do.

You might not agree with the decision she's made, but harassing her and trying to ruin her life because of it and "deserving worse" is revolting and immoral
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 04, 2021, 05:29:40 PM
I too, would like to follow Sinema into a bathroom...


...blelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelelele
You wanna watch her take a dump?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 04, 2021, 05:34:12 PM
You're a smart guy

You should be able to figure out why this is horrible and repugnant.

It's not like she was extorting money from baby orphans to run a prostitution ring.

She's doing what her job was and forming her own opinion and not following the herd. Not to mention she's not bending over to outside pressure telling her what the freak to do.

You might not agree with the decision she's made, but harassing her and trying to ruin her life because of it and "deserving worse" is revolting and immoral
Cry more
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 04, 2021, 05:37:54 PM
One on hand: countless preventable deaths of despair every year in this country

On the other hand: someone with immense power and leverage to do something about it, being paid not to do it, being made uncomfortable

Respectability politics are a joke, and it's clear some people would prefer politicians politely and calmly tell Americans to get fucked than have anyone rock the boat even a little.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 04, 2021, 07:02:42 PM
One on hand: countless preventable deaths of despair every year in this country

On the other hand: someone with immense power and leverage to do something about it, being paid not to do it, being made uncomfortable

Respectability politics are a joke, and it's clear some people would prefer politicians politely and calmly tell Americans to get fucked than have anyone rock the boat even a little.

Without getting into the absurd hyperbole that is your first sentence, what those who eschew respectability politics never realize is that the tactics they advocate for most assuredly will be used against them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 04, 2021, 07:48:10 PM


Without getting into the absurd hyperbole that is your first sentence, what those who eschew respectability politics never realize is that the tactics they advocate for most assuredly will be used against them.

Without getting into you pretending no Americans die of poverty related causes every year, those tactics and worse are already used against people who agree with me. It's like when Glenn Greenwald types "warn" any attempt to censor speech will also be used against the left when it already is. Pretty hollow threat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 04, 2021, 08:18:37 PM

Without getting into you pretending no Americans die of poverty related causes every year, those tactics and worse are already used against people who agree with me. It's like when Glenn Greenwald types "warn" any attempt to censor speech will also be used against the left when it already is. Pretty hollow threat.

Yes, we only had a summer of unabated rioting by angry leftists without any sort of consequence while shitposters and autists get locked up indiscriminately and indefinitely under the guise of what they did being "As BaD As 9/11" but its leftists who are under attack and disparately treated.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 04, 2021, 08:42:04 PM
One on hand: countless preventable deaths of despair every year in this country

On the other hand: someone with immense power and leverage to do something about it, being paid not to do it, being made uncomfortable

Respectability politics are a joke, and it's clear some people would prefer politicians politely and calmly tell Americans to get fucked than have anyone rock the boat even a little.


So you genuinely believe that EVERYTHING in that bill goes to this goal, and none of it is bullshit?

Or do you believe that politicians should be obligated to vote for ANYTHING that benefits someone, regardless of how much bullshit is in it?

The fact is none of these politicians give a excrement about the people, just pushing their agenda.

If the goal was end countless despair they'd make a bill where 100% of the goal was to go to that cause.

In this case it's very much not, and the mentality of if you don't agree with me then you think everyone should die. Is exactly why this bill hasn't gotten passed
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on October 04, 2021, 09:03:51 PM
In this case it's very much not, and the mentality of if you don't agree with me then you think everyone should die. Is exactly why this bill hasn't gotten passed

You genuinely think if people were more charitable in their mentality toward people in power this bill would have passed? It's such a backward way of thinking about politics it's almost admirable.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 04, 2021, 09:27:35 PM
You genuinely think if people were more charitable in their mentality toward people in power this bill would have passed? It's such a backward way of thinking about politics it's almost admirable.

No

I was more suggesting that the if you're not with me your against me mentality wasn't encouraged and so prevalent people would be capable of working together and finding a middle ground
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 04, 2021, 10:45:58 PM


No

I was more suggesting that the if you're not with me your against me mentality wasn't encouraged and so prevalent people would be capable of working together and finding a middle ground

Sinemanchin and everyone to their right has not acted in good faith, the "middle ground" has been yanked 50% to the right about 3 times already on this legislation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 05, 2021, 12:05:50 AM

Sinemanchin and everyone to their right has not acted in good faith, the "middle ground" has been yanked 50% to the right about 3 times already on this legislation.

If literally nobody on the opposite side of the aisle, and freaking moderates in your own freaking party won't support it.

Are you sure it's the other side of the aisle not acting in good faith?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 05, 2021, 12:59:40 AM
If literally nobody on the opposite side of the aisle, and freaking moderates in your own freaking party won't support it.

Are you sure it's the other side of the aisle not acting in good faith?



100% positive.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 05, 2021, 03:29:25 AM
100% positive.

And that attitude is why nothing is getting done

On a side note I don't think the Republicans are right either.

It's freaking jerkoffs at war with each other.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 06, 2021, 09:57:56 PM
Absolute sociopath

https://twitter.com/axios/status/1445914913981931521?t=DjoFgb-ywW_OhNWS_107Eg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 06, 2021, 11:34:32 PM
Senator Joe Manchin needs to freak the hell off.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 07, 2021, 12:29:36 PM
? ? ?

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211007/7cef443cde4afd7313be905255ab6a14.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 07, 2021, 06:08:56 PM
? ? ?

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211007/7cef443cde4afd7313be905255ab6a14.jpg)

Maybe they screwed up and that's the negative?   oddball ofays..   : )

Would love to see what Chappelle would make of this

.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2021, 06:36:42 AM
I suppose it could be worse, it could have been a stock photo of a black guy above a "tough on crime" section.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2021, 08:20:03 AM

Sinemanchin and everyone to their right has not acted in good faith, the "middle ground" has been yanked 50% to the right about 3 times already on this legislation.

Arguing the "other side" (which now includes Democrats) isn't acting in good faith while supporting women being harangued in the bathroom.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2021, 08:44:39 AM
Arguing the "other side" (which now includes Democrats) isn't acting in good faith while supporting women being harangued in the bathroom.
Yes, there are bad democrats. No, I don't care if people are rude to them. They're not victims.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 08, 2021, 08:46:50 AM
Someone wants to walk in on me taking a dump, that's their fatal mistake. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2021, 08:49:04 AM
Yes, there are bad democrats. No, I don't care if people are rude to them. They're not victims.

They're "bad" because they don't agree with your policy positions and therefore are the enemy and must be punished!

That's not absolutist or authoritarian in any way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2021, 08:51:12 AM
They're "bad" because they don't agree with your policy positions and therefore are the enemy and must be punished!

That's not absolutist or authoritarian in any way.
Waaah believing things should be one way and not another way is faaaascist
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2021, 09:06:31 AM
Waaah believing things should be one way and not another way is faaaascist

You want things to be one way.

But it's the other way.

No, in all seriousness that doesn't make anyone a fascist.

But thinking that certain conduct is acceptable to effectuate your sociopolitical goals can absolutely make one an authoritarian depending on the conduct.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2021, 11:35:10 AM


You want things to be one way.

But it's the other way.

No, in all seriousness that doesn't make anyone a fascist.

But thinking that certain conduct is acceptable to effectuate your sociopolitical goals can absolutely make one an authoritarian depending on the conduct.

Imagine having a sense of power dynamics this backwards. Who wields the authority in this situation?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 08, 2021, 11:45:05 AM

Imagine having a sense of power dynamics this backwards. Who wields the authority in this situation?

If Sinema ate at Shilla, she'd have all the power in this situation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2021, 11:47:33 AM

Imagine having a sense of power dynamics this backwards. Who wields the authority in this situation?

Without even getting into the absolute PR campaign being waged against Manchin and Sinema, the constant barrage from the same media that heralded Sinema's predecessor specifically as a "courageous maverick" for being willing to value "country over party" (funny how that's out the window), and the fact that they're actually bucking authority when you consider the true power brokers in their own party want them to heel, because people achieve public service that gives their opponents carte blanche?

You and I both know if anyone with a certain red hat decided to accost some poopchute like AOC or Cori Bush, and follow them into the bathroom in a similar manner there'd be hell to pay. AOC acts like her experience on 1/6 is what Sinema actually went through.

Re: power dynamics, we do have an aristocracy in this country of political elites, and further ceding power to absolute uber-statists with legislation such as the "build back better" bill is exactly how we continue to destroy a middle class that's already overtaxed to begin with.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 08, 2021, 11:51:49 AM
Without even getting into the absolute PR campaign being waged against Manchin and Sinema, the constant barrage from the same media that heralded Sinema's predecessor specifically as a "courageous maverick" for being willing to value "country over party" (funny how that's out the window), and the fact that they're actually bucking authority when you consider the true power brokers in their own party want them to heel, because people achieve public service that gives their opponents carte blanche?

You and I both know if anyone with a certain red hat decided to accost some poopchute like AOC or Cori Bush, and follow them into the bathroom in a similar manner there'd be hell to pay. AOC acts like her experience on 1/6 is what Sinema actually went through.

Re: power dynamics, we do have an aristocracy in this country of political elites, and further ceding power to absolute uber-statists with legislation such as the "build back better" bill is exactly how we continue to destroy a middle class that's already overtaxed to begin with.
So you agree, raise taxes on the power brokers. We're getting somewhere.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2021, 12:00:54 PM
So you agree, raise taxes on the power brokers. We're getting somewhere.

Why is it every single time this is attempted, the "power brokers" turn out to be anyone making over 35k a year?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 08, 2021, 12:47:40 PM
Why is it every single time this is attempted, the "power brokers" turn out to be anyone making over 35k a year?
The guy has said he won't raise taxes on any singles making under $400k or joint making under $450k about milllion times. It would be a death sentence for him if he all of a sudden raised taxes on poor or middle class people.  If he changed it down to $300k that's one thing but no one's coming close to raising taxes on people making $35k.  But I'm sure someone will make it a huge gotcha moment if some state raises a gas tax by 0.01 cents.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2021, 12:51:58 PM
The guy has said he won't raise taxes on any singles making under $400k or joint making under $450k about milllion times. It would be a death sentence for him if he all of a sudden raised taxes on poor or middle class people.  If he changed it down to $300k that's one thing but no one's coming close to raising taxes on people making $35k.  But I'm sure someone will make it a huge gotcha moment if some state raises a gas tax by 0.01 cents.

Oh, Joe Biden said it so it must be true!  ;D ;D ;D

The fact is, this particular piece of legislation is IMPOSSIBLE to effectuate without an across the board tax hike.

It wouldn't be a "death sentence" considering the way corporate media has acted as his freaking Praetorian Guard. Jonathan Chait out here literally writing that any opposition to Biden is authoritarianism.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 08, 2021, 01:08:32 PM
Oh, Joe Biden said it so it must be true!  ;D ;D ;D

The fact is, this particular piece of legislation is IMPOSSIBLE to effectuate without an across the board tax hike.

It wouldn't be a "death sentence" considering the way corporate media has acted as his freaking Praetorian Guard. Jonathan Chait out here literally writing that any opposition to Biden is authoritarianism.
It doesn't matter what anyone says, you assume if Trump didn't approve it, it's cancer. No democrat should ever do anything good. There's no point in us going around this circle again.  But here I am.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 08, 2021, 01:09:32 PM
If Sinema ate at Shilla, she'd have all the power in this situation.

This is the kind of politics I want to watch
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2021, 01:15:10 PM
It doesn't matter what anyone says, you assume if Trump didn't approve it, it's cancer. No democrat should ever do anything good. There's no point in us going around this circle again.  But here I am.

 
If anything, your assertion above that just because Biden said his plan won't tax anyone over 400k essentially means we should take him at his word is way more indicative of blindly following someone than I ever treated Trump. Want me to go back to when Fen and I were literally arguing about Trump striking Syria? I think you'd be surprised at the positions taken.

It doesn't matter what anyone says when juxtaposed with reality.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 08, 2021, 01:16:26 PM
The guy has said he won't raise taxes on any singles making under $400k or joint making under $450k about milllion times. It would be a death sentence for him if he all of a sudden raised taxes on poor or middle class people.  If he changed it down to $300k that's one thing but no one's coming close to raising taxes on people making $35k.  But I'm sure someone will make it a huge gotcha moment if some state raises a gas tax by 0.01 cents.


The assumption is being that people are too stupid to think.

I 100% agree Joe Biden would not raise the income tax on people making less than 400k a year.

In his mind, and technically, this makes him keeping to his promise.

Does this mean he wouldn't raise taxes on people making less than 400k a year? Absolutely freaking not

Whether it has to do with investments, property taxes, corporations, or literally anything even remotely related to going green. These all have significant bottom line impacts on many people making less than exorbitant amounts of money.

Not to mention is there some freaking delusion from the left about corporations? If you ask Badger any business should be burned to the ground because they're rich and evil. If you raise taxes on corporations you don't think they're going to somehow pass that cost on to the consumer?

It's possible that corporations eat some of that cost/pain, but a fair if not large amount of that will come from the consumer as well
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 08, 2021, 01:21:25 PM
On a side note, if the US could raise taxes on the rich, in a vacuum, I would definitely support that.

The problem is right now the tax code is freaking retarded.

Close loopholes (ie corporate options), make a simplified dumbed down tax bracket for 401ks and retirement accounts, there's so much to do where you could get bipartisan support on legitimately raising taxes in a transparent way.

Instead everyone wants to jerk you around, and use it to hide what they're actually doing x which is tugging on their constituents dick under the table
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 08, 2021, 01:22:10 PM
If you raise taxes on corporations you don't think they're going to somehow pass that cost on to the consumer?

Quote
"There are some — and I’m not sure if this is the case in this report — who argue that, in the past, companies have passed on these costs to consumers," Psaki said in the briefing. "I’m not sure if that’s the argument being made in this report. We feel that that’s unfair and absurd, and the American people would not stand for that."
- Jen Psaki

This is the level of economic understanding we're dealing with here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 08, 2021, 01:23:23 PM
On a side note, if the US could raise taxes on the rich, in a vacuum, I would definitely support that.

The problem is right now the tax code is freaking retarded.

Close loopholes (ie corporate options), make a simplified dumbed down tax bracket for 401ks and retirement accounts, there's so much to do where you could get bipartisan support on legitimately raising taxes in a transparent way.

Instead everyone wants to jerk you around, and use it to hide what they're actually doing x which is tugging on their constituents dick under the table
You can't get bipartisan support on anything.  Except maybe that Mark Zuckerberg is creepy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 08, 2021, 02:46:55 PM
- Jen Psaki

This is the level of economic understanding we're dealing with here.

 - Jen Psaki, bushmaster:  "read my lips (if you can): no new taxes"

    https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/45/Fremont_Solstice_Cyclists_2013_334.jpg/399px-Fremont_Solstice_Cyclists_2013_334.jpg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 10, 2021, 10:48:56 AM
Opponents of the bill could not have possibly received more favorable media coverage than they have so far

https://twitter.com/CBSNewsPress/status/1447209082818121734?t=_Okr5Pp8MWD9jFaXGiipug&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 10, 2021, 11:00:03 PM
This guy was the math candidate

https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1447199730153500672?t=9dieENSoQh4118JHe5mjoQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 10, 2021, 11:40:07 PM
Opponents of the bill could not have possibly received more favorable media coverage than they have so far

https://twitter.com/CBSNewsPress/status/1447209082818121734?t=_Okr5Pp8MWD9jFaXGiipug&s=19

Are you saying that most Americans don't understand the majority of what's in that 2,465 page bill and the media hasn't adequately been explaining what's on all 2,465 pages?

Say it ain't so!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 11, 2021, 08:48:38 AM
Are you saying that most Americans don't understand the majority of what's in that 2,465 page bill and the media hasn't adequately been explaining what's on all 2,465 pages?

Say it ain't so!
I'm saying the media has almost exclusively reported on the bill's cost instead of anything it would do, to the delight of bad faith actors and the ignorant.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 11, 2021, 03:31:15 PM
Opponents of the bill could not have possibly received more favorable media coverage than they have so far

https://twitter.com/CBSNewsPress/status/1447209082818121734?t=_Okr5Pp8MWD9jFaXGiipug&s=19
I'm saying the media has almost exclusively reported on the bill's cost instead of anything it would do, to the delight of bad faith actors
and the ignorant.

With all due respect Badger those two posts read like a peevish oversimplification based on the nagging suspicion that Manchin and Sinema are going to foul up the works by not towing the line.  Myself, I've no problem with the bill however I do acknowledge why some of the "ignorant" (as a matter of conscience) would balk at the prospect of paying for the millions of abortions of others (the Hyde provision question). 

As for the "cost/what's in it?" question, I'm aware of the main provisions, i.e. free community college (2 yr), extended family/medical leave, expanded Medicare, childcare & universal pre-k), extended tax credits, climate change provisions/incentives, etc., and I really found out basically by "looking and listening" to various sources (both for and against). 

As for Manchin himself who's been described in some quarters here as a 'sociopath'  : )  I can only comment on Kyrstin herself:

 (would - both 'then' and 'now')

 (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d4/Kyrstensinema.jpg/186px-Kyrstensinema.jpg)
 (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/Rep_Kyrsten_Sinema%2C_Official_Portrait_%28cropped%29.jpg/176px-Rep_Kyrsten_Sinema%2C_Official_Portrait_%28cropped%29.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 11, 2021, 03:37:22 PM
Considering the US federal government can pay for anything money can buy, it does leave only two possibilities for opposing the bill for its price tag: lying or ignorance.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 11, 2021, 04:33:03 PM
Considering the US federal government can pay for anything money can buy, it does leave only two possibilities for opposing the bill for its price tag: lying or ignorance.


Fair point.   Or, there are those who are paranoid about the down-the-road impacts of the bill and who view the US federal gov't as an extension of their wallet, i.e. "why should I have to pay for dem freeloadahs."   Me, I think for people no matter what their circumstances are to be without e.g. any access to healthcare borders on unconscionable but at the same time there are some misplaced "rugged individualists" who don't get the big picture. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 11, 2021, 05:04:59 PM
towing the line

Toeing. As in the start of a race.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 11, 2021, 05:27:22 PM
But of course, thx.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 11, 2021, 08:30:36 PM
Considering the US federal government can pay for anything money can buy, it does leave only two possibilities for opposing the bill for its price tag: lying or ignorance.


Except you're leaving out the most important part about the government having infinite free money.

Is it devalues all other money, increasing inflation. Even by people who put out this line of thinking that the government can buy anything they want.

It literally saps away peoples live savings (many of whom are broke to begin with)

And the rich will have the better strategies to mitigate this as they're more capable of having money in stocks and businesses (they also have more money to be negatively impacted by inflation)

But this line of thinking that the government can and should buy everything ever to make the whole world rainbows and unicorns is completely delusional
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 11, 2021, 08:50:18 PM
Except you're leaving out the most important part about the government having infinite free money.

Is it devalues all other money, increasing inflation. Even by people who put out this line of thinking that the government can buy anything they want.

It literally saps away peoples live savings (many of whom are broke to begin with)

And the rich will have the better strategies to mitigate this as they're more capable of having money in stocks and businesses (they also have more money to be negatively impacted by inflation)

But this line of thinking that the government can and should buy everything ever to make the whole world rainbows and unicorns is completely delusional

1. Deficit spending doesn't inherently cause inflation

2. Tax the rich more if you actually care about them having an unfair advantage

3. The government should help make people's lives less miserable, the fact that you and others think that's a unicorn says more about you than anything else
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 11, 2021, 10:32:14 PM
1. Deficit spending doesn't inherently cause inflation

2. Tax the rich more if you actually care about them having an unfair advantage

3. The government should help make people's lives less miserable, the fact that you and others think that's a unicorn says more about you than anything else


Yes we fundamentally disagree.

I believe the individual is responsible for bettering their lives, you believe it's the governments responsiblity.

It is what it is, but you do often presume that your way is the only way.

I will gladly acknowledge that there's benefits to both.

And despite me thinking it's the individuals job to take care of themselves I know in reality it's an ideal mix of both that would benefit people the most.

This multi trillion dollar thing is full of way too much bullshit.

You want to make everyone's lives better? Scrap this giant freaking retarded bill and reform health care. I'd support Universal Healthcare before supporting this garbage
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 14, 2021, 01:48:30 PM
https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1448685895511588866?t=ss47R0z0Kj88qZkyPPTJ2g&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 14, 2021, 02:04:59 PM
https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1448685895511588866?t=ss47R0z0Kj88qZkyPPTJ2g&s=19

That sounds like quite a excrement car. I don't think he's very good at this whole politics thing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 14, 2021, 05:13:12 PM
https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1448685895511588866?t=ss47R0z0Kj88qZkyPPTJ2g&s=19

Noance
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 16, 2021, 07:39:49 AM
https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1449150745354412035?t=YwkZFTaTk3_NfqIO09mBsg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 19, 2021, 07:12:06 AM
https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1449150745354412035?t=YwkZFTaTk3_NfqIO09mBsg&s=19
He's just a regular moderate dude! Finding the middle ground between survival and misery!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 19, 2021, 07:14:03 AM
Jay Jacobs goes full dcm mode

https://twitter.com/morganfmckay/status/1450163231591473154?t=MFXykrpcWRGFsaaohKiGuA&s=19

https://twitter.com/ZachReports/status/1450205350737678343?t=LuPP3b_EF9erIXpYBoCN_g&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 19, 2021, 09:05:47 AM
Jay Jacobs goes full dcm mode

https://twitter.com/morganfmckay/status/1450163231591473154?t=MFXykrpcWRGFsaaohKiGuA&s=19

https://twitter.com/ZachReports/status/1450205350737678343?t=LuPP3b_EF9erIXpYBoCN_g&s=19

Sounds like a bunch of whiney bitches crying because someone tickled their delicate sensibilities

The dude used an extreme example to make a point, and then your cancel culture warriors broke out the tears
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 19, 2021, 09:16:10 AM
Sounds like a bunch of whiney bitches crying because someone tickled their delicate sensibilities

The dude used an extreme example to make a point, and then your cancel culture warriors broke out the tears
Thank you for meeting expectations
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 19, 2021, 10:33:13 AM
Wonder how this plays out.

https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1450479352332816387?s=20 (https://twitter.com/Tom_Winter/status/1450479352332816387?s=20)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 19, 2021, 02:40:00 PM
Omg people are still taking part in the MuH rUsSiA delusion?

I guess that's what the narrative is going to have to be because "hey Americans you're just going to have to re-adjust your expectations" from WaPo today re: inflation and supply shortages is a clear losing strategy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 19, 2021, 02:44:14 PM
Omg people are still taking part in the MuH rUsSiA delusion?

I guess that's what the narrative is going to have to be because "hey Americans you're just going to have to re-adjust your expectations" from WaPo today re: inflation and supply shortages is a clear losing strategy.
The walls are closing in on Oleg Deripaska
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 19, 2021, 03:00:01 PM
The walls are closing in on Oleg Deripaska

If you're a russian oligarch and you don't have ownership of a major basketball or soccer team, what the freak are you doing with yourself?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 19, 2021, 03:59:14 PM
If you're a russian oligarch and you don't have ownership of a major basketball or soccer team, what the freak are you doing with yourself?
Paying for Facebook shitposts to smear Hillary, obv
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 19, 2021, 06:22:09 PM
Paying for Facebook shitposts to smear Hillary, obv
^ Granted the guy's a money-laundering cheat and a snake but exactly what's wrong here? ^^^

        Hillary d'Arc
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/76/Stilke_Hermann_Anton_-_Joan_of_Arc%27s_Death_at_the_Stake.jpg/167px-Stilke_Hermann_Anton_-_Joan_of_Arc%27s_Death_at_the_Stake.jpg)


TIL that 98 year old Hank the WC Kissinger underwent coronary bypass 40 years ago and that his daddy-in-law played in the NFL waaay back when.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 19, 2021, 10:15:51 PM


^ Granted the guy's a money-laundering cheat and a snake but exactly what's wrong here? ^^^

It's a joke about her supporters blaming Russian interference for her fumbling before the goal line.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 20, 2021, 01:19:16 AM

It's a joke about her supporters blaming Russian interference for her fumbling before the goal line.

 Got it     

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a0/What_Happened_%28Hillary_Rodham_Clinton%29_book_cover.jpg/159px-What_Happened_%28Hillary_Rodham_Clinton%29_book_cover.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 20, 2021, 10:57:03 AM
https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1450588352093294592?t=9IMXqoXFPCAtXsvfmz37Dw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 20, 2021, 11:04:04 AM
https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1450588352093294592?t=9IMXqoXFPCAtXsvfmz37Dw&s=19

Rudy already teeing up that insanity defense.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 20, 2021, 01:32:06 PM
https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1450588352093294592?t=9IMXqoXFPCAtXsvfmz37Dw&s=19

"In my day, we had names for people who sold bedrooms for one night."

Er, hoteliers? Like, um.....
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 20, 2021, 06:22:41 PM
https://twitter.com/John_Hudson/status/1450871021809045506?t=YhjaJgBG6ywDneH9S25pLA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 21, 2021, 09:32:22 AM
https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/21/politics/sinema-veterans-quit-advisory-board/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 21, 2021, 11:39:00 AM
https://www.cnn.com/2021/10/21/politics/sinema-veterans-quit-advisory-board/index.html

lol, what performative bullshit.


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 21, 2021, 12:40:59 PM
lol, what performative bullshit.




I'm sure all 5 of them have read the entirety of the proposed bill before advising her to support it.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 21, 2021, 02:23:43 PM
I'm sure all 5 of them have read the entirety of the proposed bill before advising her to support it.
That would be relevant if Sinema had specified what in the bill she actually objects to, besides spending.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 21, 2021, 02:30:32 PM
That would be relevant if Sinema had specified what in the bill she actually objects to, besides spending.
She object to whatever her lobbyists just told her to object to.  Those things.  But only if forced to say anything.  To one person.  Behind closed doors.  Maybe. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 22, 2021, 07:35:31 AM
Lol.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211022/75f84edf5183cce2953d2f4e21ae91dd.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 22, 2021, 03:01:42 PM
Shocked, I tell you. Shocked.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/22/twitter-admits-bias-in-algorithm-for-rightwing-politicians-and-news-outlets
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 22, 2021, 03:17:39 PM
Shocked, I tell you. Shocked.

https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/oct/22/twitter-admits-bias-in-algorithm-for-rightwing-politicians-and-news-outlets

Looking forward to when they admit that their TOS isn't meted out in an evenhanded manner.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 22, 2021, 04:18:31 PM
Looking forward to when they admit that their TOS isn't meted out in an evenhanded manner.
#FreeMB
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 25, 2021, 04:07:10 PM
Classic Atlantic prig preach..

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2021/10/stop-shopping-global-supply-chain-shipping-delays/620465/

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 25, 2021, 04:14:17 PM
Classic Atlantic prig preach..

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2021/10/stop-shopping-global-supply-chain-shipping-delays/620465/

The Praetorian Guard continues to circle around it's dementia ridden subject.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 26, 2021, 07:22:09 PM
Happy birthday HRC

https://twitter.com/neeratanden/status/1452957398763778055

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 27, 2021, 09:38:25 AM
Billionaire's tax.  It won't pass, but nice to see it brought up.  Amazing how much money it could raise and only affect 700 people.

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/578640-wyden-releases-billionaires-tax-proposal-for-spending-package
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 27, 2021, 09:42:58 AM
Happy birthday HRC

https://twitter.com/neeratanden/status/1452957398763778055

Two complete and total pieces of excrement.

Billionaire's tax.  It won't pass, but nice to see it brought up.  Amazing how much money it could raise and only affect 700 people.

https://thehill.com/policy/finance/578640-wyden-releases-billionaires-tax-proposal-for-spending-package

Well, at least it's a better idea then the absurdity being floated by pumpkin head Yellin of taxing unrealized gains.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 27, 2021, 09:46:40 AM
Two complete and total pieces of excrement.

Well, at least it's a better idea then the absurdity being floated by pumpkin head Yellin of taxing unrealized gains.
That's what it is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 27, 2021, 10:00:31 AM
That's what it is.

Except he's seeking to place a sky high baseline for who gets taxed whereas Yellin idiotically wants unrealized capital gains taxed across the board. Which is freaking lunacy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 27, 2021, 10:05:19 AM
Except he's seeking to place a sky high baseline for who gets taxed whereas Yellin idiotically wants unrealized capital gains taxed across the board. Which is freaking lunacy.
Oh.  Yeah, this makes more sense.  I don't have any issues with someone being rich, but there comes a point where you are just a hoarder.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 27, 2021, 11:00:00 AM
Two complete and total pieces of excrement.

Well, at least it's a better idea then the absurdity being floated by pumpkin head Yellin of taxing unrealized gains.
You obviously just can't stand the thought of a woman being in charge /s

/s/s/ssssssSSSSSSS if it wasn't clear
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 27, 2021, 11:37:59 AM
You obviously just can't stand the thought of a woman being in charge /s

/s/s/ssssssSSSSSSS if it wasn't clear

We all know HRC doesn't identify as female
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 27, 2021, 03:42:23 PM
Whittling down the bill to nothing

https://twitter.com/eleanor_mueller/status/1453458747192451078?t=DqTwKqw2oJpnD0cdTPO8WA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 27, 2021, 04:07:33 PM
Whittling down the bill to nothing

https://twitter.com/eleanor_mueller/status/1453458747192451078?t=DqTwKqw2oJpnD0cdTPO8WA&s=19

https://www.theonion.com/biden-scales-down-2-trillion-climate-plan-to-single-re-1847901494
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 27, 2021, 04:19:49 PM
Whittling down the bill to nothing

https://twitter.com/eleanor_mueller/status/1453458747192451078?t=DqTwKqw2oJpnD0cdTPO8WA&s=19

Don't worry they're already working on new ways to steal people's money https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/27/billionaires-income-tax-details-wyden-517318
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 27, 2021, 11:16:24 PM
Keeping it at least

https://twitter.com/jbarro/status/1453545764265906177?t=YnsjVo1f_r_Ev7y1ZfZb4A&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 27, 2021, 11:16:49 PM
Don't worry they're already working on new ways to steal people's money https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/27/billionaires-income-tax-details-wyden-517318
So sorry for your loss
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 28, 2021, 01:48:24 AM
So sorry for your loss

It's okay

American Patriots Manchin and Sinema have saved the tax payers probably over a trillion dollars.

At least there's still some politicians who will fight for the people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 28, 2021, 12:27:13 PM
Whittling down the bill to nothing

https://twitter.com/eleanor_mueller/status/1453458747192451078?t=DqTwKqw2oJpnD0cdTPO8WA&s=19
Don't worry they're already working on new ways to steal people's money https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/27/billionaires-income-tax-details-wyden-517318

- dcm, what exactly is wrong with the idea of a 'negotiated' family and medical leave vs. scrapping the idea altogether?

- fyi:  https://www.mass.gov/info-details/paid-family-and-medical-leave-pfml-fact-sheet

.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 28, 2021, 02:09:42 PM
- dcm, what exactly is wrong with the idea of a 'negotiated' family and medical leave vs. scrapping the idea altogether?

- fyi:  https://www.mass.gov/info-details/paid-family-and-medical-leave-pfml-fact-sheet

.

I actually support the idea of a paid family/medical leave

I'm not sure why they couldn't find something shitty to drop instead.

That said I was under the impression that many companies offer family/medical leave. And then of course there's short term disability and FMLA. So I don't know where differences would be
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 28, 2021, 02:49:10 PM
"Noooo Joe Manchin isn't obstructing, he's just principled and thrifty"

Joe Manchin: "lmao what the freak is paid leave"

https://twitter.com/eleanor_mueller/status/1453806743113420809?t=Aeo_xDrTIdydd02yAT8M4A&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 02, 2021, 08:19:56 AM
https://twitter.com/yappelbaum/status/1455330685787463680?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 02, 2021, 07:31:56 PM
Who knew the whole country would be so freaking interested in the Virginias governors race
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 02, 2021, 08:29:28 PM
Who knew the whole country would be so freaking interested in the Virginias governors race

On one hand, I was ready to dismiss this as any sort of indictment on Biden's popularity when you consider what an actual piece of excrement Terry McAuliffe is.

But the exit polling conducted does seem to portend that the same guy who won the State by 10 points might have a hard time carrying it in 2024...

...unless Trump runs again that is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 02, 2021, 08:33:16 PM
On one hand, I was ready to dismiss this as any sort of indictment on Biden's popularity when you consider what an actual piece of excrement Terry McAuliffe is.

But the exit polling conducted does seem to portend that the same guy who won the State by 10 points might have a hard time carrying it in 2024...

...unless Trump runs again that is.

Interestingly enough Trump and Biden both decided to wag their dicks in this race way more than they should.

Though I feel like this was more about the freak Joe Biden voter than the enthused Trumper
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 02, 2021, 08:48:49 PM
McAuliffe was too Clintoney.  Thought he could just cruise to a win because he was a D.  Youngkin smoked him.  Giant Douche vs. Turd Sandwich situation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 02, 2021, 08:55:22 PM
McAuliffe was too Clintoney.  Thought he could just cruise to a win because he was a D.  Youngkin smoked him.  Giant Douche vs. Turd Sandwich situation.

The expectation is the lead is going to diminish significantly but it'll remain
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 02, 2021, 09:21:10 PM
The expectation is the lead is going to diminish significantly but it'll remain
It's over.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 02, 2021, 09:39:09 PM
Wow can't believe a Clinton toadie centrist would eat excrement like that, shocking

Must be the Russians again
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 02, 2021, 10:01:57 PM
Since 1977, the winner of VA governor race has come from the same party as the President exactly one time (2013 Obama/McAuliffe).

Edi: forgot link

https://twitter.com/dkthomp/status/1455701917930250241?s=21 (https://twitter.com/dkthomp/status/1455701917930250241?s=21)

McAuliffe is now 1/3 in VA gubernatorial races.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 02, 2021, 10:27:24 PM
Since 1977, the winner of VA governor race has come from the same party as the President exactly one time (2013 Obama/McAuliffe).

McAuliffe is now 1/3 in VA gubernatorial races.

Quote
President Joe Biden and first lady Jill Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris and former President Barack Obama, have made it clear: Virginia is a political bellwether.

"What happens in Virginia will, in large part, determine what happens in 2022, 2024 and on," Harris said, stumping for McAuliffe on Friday. "Don't let Virginia be an experiment."

Everyone also agrees Virginia historically is a bellwether
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 02, 2021, 10:37:20 PM
Everyone also agrees Virginia historically is a bellwether

If it’s a bellwether then this is actually good news for the Dems in terms of the white house.

The only two presidents to turn over after one term with an opponent in the VA governor’s mansion were Republicans.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 02, 2021, 10:43:04 PM
Everyone also agrees Virginia historically is a bellwether
Historically the sitting president suffers huge midterm losses anyway. This just kinda confirms it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 02, 2021, 10:51:10 PM
If it’s a bellwether then this is actually good news for the Dems in terms of the white house.

The only two presidents to turn over after one term with an opponent in the VA governor’s mansion were Republicans.

You're assuming Biden is going to be running, which is far from a sure thing. Turnover might be guaranteed
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 02, 2021, 11:03:35 PM
Like clockwork

https://twitter.com/heatherscope/status/1455696272489422849?t=d1SGQno0ynw3Y_VwvMzhTA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 03, 2021, 01:01:47 AM
The last person to serve two terms as governor of Virginia was Mills Edwin Godwin.
1966-1970 as a Democrat; 1974-1978 as a Republican.

NJ votes still trickling in.....and while currently losing it looks like Murphy will eventually squeeze by.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 03, 2021, 02:46:40 AM
90% of the vote in and new jerseys race is within. 1000 votes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 03, 2021, 06:20:50 AM
Like clockwork

https://twitter.com/heatherscope/status/1455696272489422849?t=d1SGQno0ynw3Y_VwvMzhTA&s=19

lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 03, 2021, 07:54:35 AM
The last person to serve two terms as governor of Virginia was Mills Edwin Godwin.
1966-1970 as a Democrat; 1974-1978 as a Republican.

NJ votes still trickling in.....and while currently losing it looks like Murphy will eventually squeeze by.

This will be an interesting one. New Jersey has not had a two term Democrat as governor since Brenden Thomas Byrne.

And in a fun synchronicity with the Virginia election, the benchmark year for this is 1977.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on November 03, 2021, 08:23:49 AM
Mainstream dems: fail to pass any significant legislation with the presidency, a tie-breaker in the Senate, a majority in Congress, and a progressive wing willing to compromise on virtually every major policy issue.

Mainstream dems upon losing subsequent elections: How could progressives do this to us?

Looking forward to R's taking both branches of congress in 2022
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 03, 2021, 09:09:04 AM
Mainstream dems: fail to pass any significant legislation with the presidency, a tie-breaker in the Senate, a majority in Congress, and a progressive wing willing to compromise on virtually every major policy issue.

Mainstream dems upon losing subsequent elections: How could progressives do this to us?

Looking forward to R's taking both branches of congress in 2022

Mainstream Dems are progressives
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 03, 2021, 09:19:10 AM
Mainstream dems: fail to pass any significant legislation with the presidency, a tie-breaker in the Senate, a majority in Congress, and a progressive wing willing to compromise on virtually every major policy issue.

Mainstream dems upon losing subsequent elections: How could progressives do this to us?

Perhaps those mainstream Dems, or whatever is left of them aren't wrong to blame those seeking to hold legislation hostage because they want their entire wish list while we're in the middle of an inflation crunch the likes of which we haven't seen in about 13 or so years while arguing that its already paid for.

Looking forward to R's taking both branches of congress in 2022

Don't fret. If 2016-2018 taught me anything it's that Republicans with a majority house, senate, occupation of the executive branch and a receptive SCOTUS could still freak up a cup of coffee. They're like the old Joker line about a dog chasing a car, once they got it they don't know what to do with it. You'll see a lot of fraudulent actors exposed in terms of running on doing this or that, being in the position of doing so and then going "lol nah I'm not going to do that."
 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 03, 2021, 09:25:05 AM
Murphy has (for the moment) taken the lead over Ciattarelli. It's only 1700 votes but based on the counties still reporting, it looks like his lead should increase.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 03, 2021, 09:57:31 AM
Mainstream Dems are progressives
Wrong

If this was true the currently debated legislation would have already been passed and not hollowed out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on November 03, 2021, 09:57:39 AM
Don't fret. If 2016-2018 taught me anything it's that Republicans with a majority house, senate, occupation of the executive branch and a receptive SCOTUS could still freak up a cup of coffee. They're like the old Joker line about a dog chasing a car, once they got it they don't know what to do with it. You'll see a lot of fraudulent actors exposed in terms of running on doing this or that, being in the position of doing so and then going "lol nah I'm not going to do that."

Largely true of both parties at the national level tbh, terrified into large-scale indecision and just attempting to capitalize on 'at least we're not the other party'

Mainstream Dems are progressives

I mean, it's largely a semantic argument, and I doubt we'd agree on a definition of what progressivism means, but I'd refer to this classic on where I position myself in regard to institutional Dems who try to claim progressivism but don't actually play those values out: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0nFvhhCulaw

I do think smart mainstream Dems have the potential to enact progressive policies if they calculate that doing so allows them to maintain power/influence/popularity, which is to my mind the reason I could support Buttigieg-type candidates, but it's hard to see a path for that becoming a reality.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 03, 2021, 09:57:41 AM
Can't believe this didn't work

https://twitter.com/waltshaub/status/1455716232007757825?t=AM3DtgPzlcqEw-gRvtvP4A&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 03, 2021, 10:00:53 AM


Don't fret. If 2016-2018 taught me anything it's that Republicans with a majority house, senate, occupation of the executive branch and a receptive SCOTUS could still freak up a cup of coffee.

Obligatory "not a glitch, it's a feature"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 03, 2021, 10:55:19 AM
Wrong

If this was true the currently debated legislation would have already been passed and not hollowed out.

Or the reason that hasn't passed is because the two legit independents in the party won't go along with it nor will any Republicans because it's too far left
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 03, 2021, 11:34:11 AM
Or the reason that hasn't passed is because the two legit independents in the party won't go along with it nor will any Republicans because it's too far left
It's cute that you actually believe Rs are objecting on merit and not purely to obstruct for 4 years.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 03, 2021, 11:35:28 AM
About 700 votes keeping NJ from learning antifa race theory right now

https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1455933089629233154?t=ikuI8fvAKdZp0rejE4ASxg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 03, 2021, 11:38:00 AM
It's cute that you actually believe Rs are objecting on merit and not purely to obstruct for 4 years.

It's cute you think Nancy Pelosi and Chuck Schumer led herd aren't progressives

And I'm sure it's obstructionism

But I'm also sure if it was a reasonable but left of center vote that they'd get some republican votes.

Instead it's too far left for their own party that they can't even agree on it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 03, 2021, 11:49:09 AM
About 700 votes keeping NJ from learning antifa race theory right now

https://twitter.com/SteveKornacki/status/1455933089629233154?t=ikuI8fvAKdZp0rejE4ASxg&s=19

Down to about 112 with five counties favoring Dem Democrat counties still with votes to count to the remaining two Republican counties.

EDIT: Murphy retakes the lead by roughly 14,800 votes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 03, 2021, 12:05:02 PM
It's cute that you actually believe Rs are objecting on merit and not purely to obstruct for 4 years.

No, of course, only the Dems when put in a position to do so block policy on merit. How silly of us!

The media gaslighting taking place on Antifa Race Theory (lol that was funny) is insane when you consider it's vacillated between "its not taught in schools" (a total lie) to "you're racist if you want to ban the teaching of slavery!" (a total obfuscation).

I didn't touch on the post earlier, but ONS's wife using the topic of George Floyd as something for her students to discuss in French isn't critical race theory, nor is it in my opinion an objectionable injection of politics into the classroom. Learning about redlining, Jim Crow, slavery, etc should never be out of bounds in a respectable history class, nor is it what people are fighting against. 

There are now multiple journalists like Christopher Rufo (who better get ready to be the focus of so many people's ire) who are pointing out that kids are absolutely being taught that an immutable characteristic such as skin color can determine good and evil. That is wrong.

It's becoming pretty clear that the more people see what modern "intellectuals" espousing this theory like Ibram Rogers have to offer, the more its being collectively rejected by people of all stripes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 03, 2021, 12:09:17 PM


But I'm also sure if it was a reasonable but left of center vote that they'd get some republican votes.

Again, cute
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 03, 2021, 12:11:02 PM


I didn't touch on the post earlier, but ONS's wife using the topic of George Floyd as something for her students to discuss in French isn't critical race theory, 

Weird how your peers think it is. Who gave them that idea?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 03, 2021, 12:11:30 PM
lmao
Tim Kaine chiming in

https://twitter.com/metzgov/status/1455914737892564997?t=dRyQYJG-mUC6HFm-zqSnBQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 03, 2021, 12:17:46 PM
Tim Kaine chiming in

https://twitter.com/metzgov/status/1455914737892564997?t=dRyQYJG-mUC6HFm-zqSnBQ&s=19

lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 03, 2021, 12:25:56 PM

Weird how your peers think it is. Who gave them that idea?

I should paint so broadly in terms of people having the wrong views on the right side of a topic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 03, 2021, 06:49:21 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/03/politics/joe-biden-family-border-separation-settlements/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 03, 2021, 07:09:50 PM
Tim Kaine chiming in

https://twitter.com/metzgov/status/1455914737892564997?t=dRyQYJG-mUC6HFm-zqSnBQ&s=19

Tim Kaine, hoo-ha.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 03, 2021, 07:25:48 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/03/politics/joe-biden-family-border-separation-settlements/index.html

Oh?

https://nypost.com/2021/11/03/aclu-suggests-biden-out-to-lunch-over-450k-migrant-payouts/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 03, 2021, 07:30:07 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2021/11/03/politics/joe-biden-family-border-separation-settlements/index.html

I love these stories. It's such lame derriere bullshit politicking.

Me: bojanglesman is going to masturbate on every child he sees at the next tailgate

B: No I'm not!

Me: Look at me, I stopped Bo from masturbating on children, I'm a hero
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 03, 2021, 08:10:05 PM
I love these stories. It's such lame derriere bullshit politicking.

Me: bojanglesman is going to masturbate on every child he sees at the next tailgate

B: No I'm not!

Me: Look at me, I stopped Bo from masturbating on children, I'm a hero
Except you didn't stop him....and many kids paid the price for your failure.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 03, 2021, 08:12:15 PM
Children? I thought yall were in your 50s
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 03, 2021, 08:13:39 PM
Except you didn't stop him....and many kids paid the price for your failure.

Never get in the way of an angry chimp when he's about to nut.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 03, 2021, 09:32:08 PM
I'll see myself to jail.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 03, 2021, 09:33:17 PM
I'll see myself to jail.
Pick up some Arbys on the way....on JE's dime.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 04, 2021, 11:30:30 AM
MOAR MILK

https://twitter.com/brikeilarcnn/status/1456227125346832384?t=Kc-9jvQ1dOTVCIe6zgdAVw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 04, 2021, 11:35:32 AM
How the freak are they going through 96 pints of milk a week?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 04, 2021, 11:47:25 AM
How the freak are they going through 96 pints of milk a week?
Quickly I guess. 

Maybe they have 67 kids?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 04, 2021, 11:57:05 AM
Quickly I guess. 

Maybe they have 67 kids?
I eventually watched the segment, they have a big family, but it's still an absurd amount of milk (and very inaccurate prices given)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 04, 2021, 12:18:09 PM
How the freak are they going through 96 pints of milk a week?

GOWMAD
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 04, 2021, 01:51:07 PM
MOAR MILK
https://twitter.com/brikeilarcnn/status/1456227125346832384?t=Kc-9jvQ1dOTVCIe6zgdAVw&s=19
How the freak are they going through 96 pints of milk a week?
I eventually watched the segment, they have a big family, but it's still an absurd amount of milk (and very inaccurate prices given)
post-by-post

- CNN's Brianna Keiler's mien contains traces of cuntiness with a churlish finish

- they've lots of kids (9) and they all look to be on the stocky side (5 qts/wk - growing kids are vacuums; it's doable)

- I hail from an even larger family (none adopted..although we'd screw with some of the younger ones by telling them they were) and you'd be surprised how much milk we went through.  Then again, today these size families don't really exist so that story's really an exception.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 04, 2021, 01:59:13 PM
post-by-post

- CNN's Brianna Keiler's mien contains traces of cuntiness with a churlish finish

- they've lots of kids (9) and they all look to be on the stocky side (5 qts/wk - growing kids are vacuums; it's doable)

- I hail from an even larger family (none adopted..although we'd screw with some of the younger ones by telling them they were) and you'd be surprised how much milk we went through.  Then again, today these size families don't really exist so that story's really an exception.

A couple things on this segment;

9 kids isn't exactly representative of the typical American middle class family, and as much as I respect their decision to adopt I believe it was 7 of the 9, don't put yourself in a situation that you can't afford financially. That includes having or adopting too many kids on beer money so to speak.

Milk, along with other products have risen in price, regardless of whether this is the most shining example to illustrate that fact or not, though I'd like to know where they got their baseline of $1.99. Having said that, I also get organic milk because of how long it lasts (not because I'm a pretentious freak or anything) so I honestly don't know how much a regular gallon costs.

Just outwardly making fun of said family like brain dead douchebags such as Ian Millhiser is doing is a pretty bad look IMHO, but the cruelty is the point or something or other.

Brianna Keiler is a queynte.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 04, 2021, 03:06:47 PM


Just outwardly making fun of said family like brain dead douchebags such as Ian Millhiser is doing is a pretty bad look IMHO, but the cruelty is the point or something or other.

Yes, making fun high milk intake is just as bad as kicking people off SNAP.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 05, 2021, 05:34:39 PM
Magic The Gathering posts a rare good take, blue MAGA reacts poorly

https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1456602112947806222?t=mFD58le66AuzgcaqnnGYfg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2021, 05:41:08 PM
Magic The Gathering posts a rare good take, blue MAGA reacts poorly

https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1456602112947806222?t=mFD58le66AuzgcaqnnGYfg&s=19

Cunts on there comparing January 6th to freaking 9/11 need to die
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 05, 2021, 05:57:24 PM
Magic The Gathering posts a rare good take, blue MAGA reacts poorly

https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1456602112947806222?t=mFD58le66AuzgcaqnnGYfg&s=19
That's not a good take. It nearly is, but her problem isn't with the conditions of prisons, it's that her "Patriots" are being forced to live in them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2021, 06:18:17 PM
That's not a good take. It nearly is, but her problem isn't with the conditions of prisons, it's that her "Patriots" are being forced to live in them.

Her ultimate and closing point was she supports bipartisan prison reform. Though she obviously 100% only cared about this because of January 6th
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 05, 2021, 06:21:04 PM
I'm all for prison reform but I don't recall her mentioning it until the Jan 6 assholes started having to see the inside of one. The prison in DC has been as much of a blight as the crimes of those housed in it.

That's not a good take. It nearly is, but her problem isn't with the conditions of prisons, it's that her "Patriots" are being forced to live in them.

I don't buy her being genuinely interested in the concept prior to her constituents being affected by it but if it produces positive results for everyone then I won't be upset.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on November 05, 2021, 09:14:09 PM
I will happily give credit to MTG for prison reform if it gets done. 100 times out of 100, I will happily praise whatever motivation she has if it means something gets done.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 05, 2021, 09:22:15 PM
The only prison reform she's interested in is white Republican voters not being put into it. I'd love to be wrong but I'm not and you know it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on November 05, 2021, 09:28:42 PM
The only prison reform she's interested in is white Republican voters not being put into it. I'd love to be wrong but I'm not and you know it.

I'm just saying if her words/beliefs lead to meaningful prison reform, regardless of what she's actually interested in, I'd be thrilled. If reform is contingent on her being given credit for stuff she doesn't truly believe in, I'm still thrilled and would be the first to praise her.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 05, 2021, 10:00:47 PM
The only prison reform she's interested in is white Republican voters not being put into it. I'd love to be wrong but I'm not and you know it.

What shes interested in is irrelevant, what she does is more important. The left is big on prison reform, and here you have a crazy person openly stating they want to put politics aside and reform prisons.

She was clearly biased towards the January 6thers and that was 100% why she toured the prison. But she did express sympathy to others
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 06, 2021, 09:22:53 AM
Anyway, the House passed the infrastructure bill.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 06, 2021, 10:38:06 AM
Coming to the right conclusion for the "wrong" reasons is still better than not coming to it at all. I'm not gatekeeping anyone who wants to use their platform to admit that solitary confinement is torture.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 06, 2021, 11:38:42 AM
I will freely tell someone they are a piece of excrement for only thinking that the current prison system, solitary confinement especially, is torture but I will not stop them from yielding a net positive.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 06, 2021, 12:44:24 PM
Coming to the right conclusion for the "wrong" reasons is still better than not coming to it at all. I'm not gatekeeping anyone who wants to use their platform to admit that solitary confinement is torture.

If that's what she does then I agree with you, and if the incarceration of the January 6 rioters is the catalyst for her becoming a champion of sentencing and prison reform, then that will be great news.

Until presented with evidence to the contrary, I do not believe that that she has interest in reforming sentencing or prison conditions for anyone except her chosen people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 06, 2021, 03:43:11 PM
"I demanded to see them and would have gone scorched earth if I was not allowed and was making it known."  - MTG

  Get bent pigface
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 08, 2021, 11:14:28 AM
Thank you Newsmax

(https://i.redd.it/ps9ijkl4hdy71.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 08, 2021, 11:36:00 AM
Thank you Newsmax

(https://i.redd.it/ps9ijkl4hdy71.jpg)


What the freak is this and how much does it cost to hunt it for sport on a remote island off the coast of Vancouver?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 08, 2021, 12:03:31 PM
Let's goooooooo #bipartisanship

https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1457727371826565123?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 08, 2021, 12:06:05 PM
Lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 08, 2021, 12:12:51 PM
Let's goooooooo #bipartisanship

https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1457727371826565123?s=19

MTG and Farrakhan, a match made in heaven. Literally.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 08, 2021, 02:45:26 PM
Look forward to hearing the outrage from Republicans about this.

https://www.newsweek.com/paul-gosar-anime-video-killing-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-twitter-attack-titan-1646933

(Just kidding, I'm presuming it will be the usual mix of silence and whataboutism.)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 08, 2021, 03:00:17 PM
Look forward to hearing the outrage from Republicans about this.

https://www.newsweek.com/paul-gosar-anime-video-killing-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-twitter-attack-titan-1646933

(Just kidding, I'm presuming it will be the usual mix of silence and whataboutism.)

I expected this to be much more violent and tasteless. Instead it was just freaking retarded (and tasteless). I don't think this video is nearly outrageous as you make it out to be, though it's absolutely as lame and freaking stupid (im also sure attack on Titan is hugely popular with 70 year old Evangelicals

I uhh also find it an interesting choice to make a video about illegal immigration spliced with a Japanese anime where a song is freaking sung in Japanese the whole freaking time
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on November 08, 2021, 03:33:01 PM
I uhh also find it an interesting choice to make a video about illegal immigration spliced with a Japanese anime where a song is freaking sung in Japanese the whole freaking time

Model minority status maintained
Soft power superpower status confirmed
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on November 09, 2021, 11:42:04 PM
So I guess we are stuck with jackholes chanting Lets Go Brandon at sporting events for the foreseeable future. Keep politics out of sports amirite
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 10, 2021, 03:08:31 AM
So I guess we are stuck with jackholes chsntinf Lets Go Brandon at sporting events for the foreseeable future. Keep politics out of sports amirite
Probably more fights in the stands, which will make the Jets games more entertaining.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 10, 2021, 09:04:42 AM
So I guess we are stuck with jackholes chsntinf Lets Go Brandon at sporting events for the foreseeable future. Keep politics out of sports amirite

Hey everythings political, amirite?!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 10, 2021, 09:16:13 AM
So I guess we are stuck with jackholes chsntinf Lets Go Brandon at sporting events for the foreseeable future. Keep politics out of sports amirite

To be fair this is fairly bipartisan. The Bernie Bros love them some Brandon.

Plus it's hard to compare a bunch of drunk hicks cursing to all the highly political league sanctioned excrement that's occurred.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 10, 2021, 11:25:09 AM
Lock Her Up was funnier IMO
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 10, 2021, 11:26:41 AM
If people want to not hear anti-Biden chants they should simply implore the president to do a better job and stop pretending Congress has his balls in a vise
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on November 10, 2021, 11:26:54 AM
Hey everythings political, amirite?!

Are you trying to argue that "Let's Go Brandon" isn't political now? Would love to hear it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 10, 2021, 11:31:22 AM
Are you trying to argue that "Let's Go Brandon" isn't political now? Would love to hear it.

No, I'm arguing that pretty much since the time I've been in high school my friends on the left have argued that "everything is political" when I just want to be left alone in terms of enjoying my respective hobbies and pastimes free from a political bend.

Lets Go Brandon is obviously overtly political, it's also incredibly benign given the rhetoric spewed by those who didn't like the head of the previous administration.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 10, 2021, 03:45:29 PM
Look forward to hearing the outrage from Republicans about this.

https://www.newsweek.com/paul-gosar-anime-video-killing-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-twitter-attack-titan-1646933

(Just kidding, I'm presuming it will be the usual mix of silence and whataboutism.)

Quote
On Tuesday, lawmakers from both sides of the political aisle ramped up pressure on House Minority Leader Kevin McCarthy, R-Calif., to take action.
https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/politics/2021/11/09/paul-gosar-congress-members-call-kevin-mccarthy-take-action/6355165001/



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 10, 2021, 03:51:28 PM
Look forward to hearing the outrage from Republicans about this.

https://www.newsweek.com/paul-gosar-anime-video-killing-alexandria-ocasio-cortez-twitter-attack-titan-1646933

(Just kidding, I'm presuming it will be the usual mix of silence and whataboutism.)

Rand Paul literally got attacked by his crazy neighbor and the left collectively laughed at it. Steve Scalise was moments from death, and Joy Reid and the like tried actually placing culpability on him because he was opposed to Obamacare. But of course, that's just whataboutism, whereas when the left points out any perception of a differing response, it's principled opposition.

FWIW, it was a dumb tweet and he shouldn't have done it even if AOC is a contemptible sack of excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 10, 2021, 03:53:26 PM

I didn't even need to open that to know who was speaking out about it from the Republican side of the House.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 12, 2021, 06:15:53 PM
I didn't even need to open that to know   who was speaking out about it from the Republican side of the House.
  ....and why you symbolically left the quote blank?   

   #impressed
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 12, 2021, 08:53:34 PM
  ....and why you symbolically left the quote blank?   

   #impressed

I think that's just what happens when you quote a message that itself was just quoted text.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 12, 2021, 08:59:49 PM
I think that's just what happens when you quote a message that itself was just quoted text.

thx for the heads up Cato
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 16, 2021, 12:39:53 AM
Cancel culture again

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/581655-wyoming-gop-votes-to-no-longer-recognize-cheney-as-a-republican
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 17, 2021, 09:03:31 AM
freaking Democrats, all they want to do is line the pockets of the rich

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/11/16/second-biggest-program-democrats-budget-gives-billions-rich/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 17, 2021, 10:10:07 AM
freaking Democrats, all they want to do is line the pockets of the rich

https://www.washingtonpost.com/business/2021/11/16/second-biggest-program-democrats-budget-gives-billions-rich/

I think they should have increased SALT, but not to $80,000.  That's too high.  Maybe $30-$40K.  That should cover the higher cost of living/taxes in some areas compared to others.  People that are up in that $80,000 SALT range don't need a break.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 17, 2021, 05:35:21 PM
Paul Gosar censured, stripped of committee assignments.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-votes-censure-gop-rep-paul-gosar-over-video-depicting-n1284008 (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-votes-censure-gop-rep-paul-gosar-over-video-depicting-n1284008)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 18, 2021, 08:43:12 AM
Paul Gosar censured, stripped of committee assignments.
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-votes-censure-gop-rep-paul-gosar-over-video-depicting-n1284008 (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-votes-censure-gop-rep-paul-gosar-over-video-depicting-n1284008)
He has only himself to blame - like there wasn't going to be any fallout from this dumb Kathy Griffith-level stunt.  Savvy political chops there Gosar.


and in the blue corner
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/16/us/politics/fbi-school-threats.html

and in the red corner
https://nypost.com/2021/11/16/fbi-created-threat-tags-over-alleged-harassment-of-educators-whistleblower/

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 18, 2021, 08:58:49 AM
House Republicans don't like it when counterterrorism resources are used against domestic terrorists.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 18, 2021, 09:16:00 AM
House Republicans don't like it when counterterrorism resources are used against domestic terrorists.

I think they love it.

The culture war, specifically over schools and education was one of the most prominent issues that led to the huge swing in Virginia. And almost certainly this will be the GOPs strategy in the midterms.

So they're probably salivating everytime something comes out that looks like Joe Biden wants to arrest parents for caring about what their children are taught in schools.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 18, 2021, 10:40:00 AM
I think they love it.

The culture war, specifically over schools and education was one of the most prominent issues that led to the huge swing in Virginia. And almost certainly this will be the GOPs strategy in the midterms.

So they're probably salivating everytime something comes out that looks like Joe Biden wants to arrest parents for caring about what their children are taught in schools.
Amazing non sequitur
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 18, 2021, 11:04:39 AM
Cancel culture canceling themselves

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/amp/news/2021/11/17/college-democrats-of-america-dnc-522864
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 18, 2021, 12:15:51 PM
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1461073375523229707?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 18, 2021, 12:50:41 PM
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1461073375523229707?s=21

Yeah but she's hot
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 18, 2021, 01:44:31 PM
Yeah but she's hot

Inferior to Pelosi sadly
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 18, 2021, 02:27:47 PM
Inferior to Pelosi sadly
Pelosi danglebags ftw
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 18, 2021, 02:46:48 PM
Whenever I want to know what one of the worst people on the internet is thinking, I head over to Aaron Rupar's twitter page.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 18, 2021, 03:08:08 PM
Whenever I want to know what one of the worst people on the internet is thinking, I head over to Aaron Rupar's twitter page.

https://twitter.com/donwinslow/status/1461091754745098240?s=21

Bonus points for the source
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 18, 2021, 06:35:22 PM
Bonus points for the source
*rimshot*

https://www.salon.com/2021/08/31/lauren-boeberts-husband-did-jail-time-for-lewd-exposure-in-a-bowling-alley-she-was-there/


Cuntgressional catfight!!

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ilhan-omar-boebert-defecates-congress-brother-husband
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 18, 2021, 10:35:26 PM
Kevin McCarthy attempting to delay the Build Back Better vote with a pseudo filibuster. He's one of only three members of the House who can drone on infinitely on the floor without interruption.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on November 19, 2021, 07:26:01 AM
*rimshot*

https://www.salon.com/2021/08/31/lauren-boeberts-husband-did-jail-time-for-lewd-exposure-in-a-bowling-alley-she-was-there/


Cuntgressional catfight!!

https://www.foxnews.com/politics/ilhan-omar-boebert-defecates-congress-brother-husband
Speaking of boobert. I just saw this twitter thread

https://mobile.twitter.com/nicole_chenelle/status/1422449854224031745?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1422449854224031745%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2F247sports.com%2Fcollege%2Fkansas%2FBoard%2F103734%2FContents%2FRight-wing-superstars-literally-failed-crisis-actors-168666524%2F

No clue how legit it is, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 19, 2021, 09:25:31 AM
Speaking of boobert. I just saw this twitter thread

https://mobile.twitter.com/nicole_chenelle/status/1422449854224031745?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1422449854224031745%7Ctwgr%5E%7Ctwcon%5Es1_&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2F247sports.com%2Fcollege%2Fkansas%2FBoard%2F103734%2FContents%2FRight-wing-superstars-literally-failed-crisis-actors-168666524%2F

No clue how legit it is, but it wouldn't surprise me in the least.

Looking through the thread there's no way it's not fake. This unverified person has a huge list of everyone on there
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 19, 2021, 09:38:05 AM
Basic googling is telling me that it isn't a legit talent agency.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on November 19, 2021, 10:11:35 AM
Basic googling is telling me that it isn't a legit talent agency.

Correct, it's a platform for people to find auditions.

By no means am I saying its legit I just saw the conspiracy right before I read this thread and thought it was funny seeing as she does act like she's a tv show character. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 19, 2021, 10:41:53 AM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/64/Barbed_Wire_-_Publishers_Disclaimer.jpg/320px-Barbed_Wire_-_Publishers_Disclaimer.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 20, 2021, 02:44:24 PM
When will this be condemned and censured as 1000 times worse than some freaking retard posting an anime clip

Ilhan Omar tweets support of Amber Ruffin clip slamming 'f----- up' Rittenhouse jury
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/ihan-omar-tweets-support-amber-ruffin-clip-slamming-rittenhouse-jury.amp

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 20, 2021, 05:18:17 PM
When will this be condemned and censured as 1000 times worse than some freaking retard posting an anime clip

Ilhan Omar tweets support of Amber Ruffin clip slamming 'f----- up' Rittenhouse jury
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/ihan-omar-tweets-support-amber-ruffin-clip-slamming-rittenhouse-jury.amp
Amber Ruffin, 'fucked up'
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9a/Amber_Ruffin.jpg/181px-Amber_Ruffin.jpg)


Amber Waves, fucked up
"I want you to cum in me"
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/52/Julianne_Moore_%2815011443428%29.jpg/180px-Julianne_Moore_%2815011443428%29.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on November 20, 2021, 10:02:48 PM
When will this be condemned and censured as 1000 times worse than some freaking retard posting an anime clip

Ilhan Omar tweets support of Amber Ruffin clip slamming 'f----- up' Rittenhouse jury
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.foxnews.com/politics/ihan-omar-tweets-support-amber-ruffin-clip-slamming-rittenhouse-jury.amp
Lol
You read too much fox news.  Watch the video she retweeted and feel atupid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 21, 2021, 07:45:12 AM
Lol
You read too much fox news.  Watch the video she retweeted and feel atupid.

Stupid felt.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 22, 2021, 11:05:11 AM
https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1462795000668950535?t=2JqR-zNOTGgZtdgvq6VfIQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 22, 2021, 02:34:01 PM
https://twitter.com/ianbremmer/status/1462795000668950535?t=2JqR-zNOTGgZtdgvq6VfIQ&s=19

Ever since the rigged DNC primaries with Hillary Clinton, can't blame people for losing faith in the corrupt electoral process
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on November 27, 2021, 06:10:56 AM
(https://i.redd.it/csn3hcb711281.jpg)

This one is just begging for cum.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 27, 2021, 07:50:10 AM
Where's the cum edit for this oen?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 27, 2021, 09:38:01 AM
Stupid felt.

why? the clip is still freaking absurd, with absolutely no basis in truth. It's a disgrace that a sitting representative could tweet out horseshit that sounds like its coming out of the derriere end of an MB post.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 27, 2021, 11:21:15 AM
why? the clip is still freaking absurd, with absolutely no basis in truth. It's a disgrace that a sitting representative could tweet out horseshit that sounds like its coming out of the derriere end of an MB post.

Don't blame your misguided, yet obvious racism on me
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 01, 2021, 10:08:56 AM
https://twitter.com/RawStory/status/1465539688085827585?t=UcmV_8ThzqJpvmqI9Q0HeQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 01, 2021, 12:19:49 PM
A world of secret hungers,
perverting the men who make your laws - F. Zappa


(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/9/99/Mehmet_Oz_official_photo.jpg)

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2021/11/dr-oz-senate-run-should-be-aha-moment-on-oprahs-quackery.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 01, 2021, 01:37:57 PM
https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1466082163837657090?t=6r9WDF5gBCiTd3QITxCchg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 02, 2021, 11:56:13 AM
Thanks to Trump's SCOTUS nominations we're probably about to see Roe v Wade overturned.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 02, 2021, 12:19:56 PM
Also government funding is set to lapse again tomorrow. Probably another CR on the way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 02, 2021, 12:29:17 PM
Also government funding is set to lapse again tomorrow. Probably another CR on the way.

CR is worked out, they just need to pass it.

Norton got her exemption in again so DC gov't is exempted from the shutdown.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 02, 2021, 04:05:51 PM
Thanks to Trump's SCOTUS nominations we're probably about to see Roe v Wade overturned.

I think conservative courts is a mostly good thing, but this country absolutely needs to move way to the left on abortion, and many other issues regarding rights to die
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 02, 2021, 10:03:48 PM
Damn some pedophile was violating private property and there was no Kyle there :(

https://www.lohud.com/story/news/2021/12/01/anti-abortion-activists-arrested-entering-white-plains-clinic/8824074002/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 02, 2021, 11:09:51 PM
Damn some pedophile was violating private property and there was no Kyle there :(

https://www.lohud.com/story/news/2021/12/01/anti-abortion-activists-arrested-entering-white-plains-clinic/8824074002/

If someone shot and killed the 3 of them, I suspect they'd be treated drastically different from Kyle by the media (and Twitter verse)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 02, 2021, 11:22:15 PM
https://www.reuters.com/world/us-defense-secretary-eyes-international-response-russia-ukraine-2021-12-02/

Quote
"Whatever we do will be done as a part of an international community. The best case though is that we won't see an incursion by the Soviet Union into the Ukraine," Austin said, accidentally calling Russia the former Soviet Union.

Exhibit 73828595 that anyone who can remember the Cold War should be politely excused from having responsibilities.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 03, 2021, 10:13:17 AM
CR is worked out, they just need to pass it.

Norton got her exemption in again so DC gov't is exempted from the shutdown.
I actually don't love that this CR goes all the way until 2/18. I have a feeling that means we're not getting a real budget passed until then, because nothing seems to get done until their backs are against the wall. I would have preferred the stress of 1-week extensions if it would lead to a long-term answer sooner.

I'll be pleasantly surprised if they manage to get it done in Dec or Jan now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 03, 2021, 12:41:50 PM
CR is worked out, they just need to pass it.

Norton got her exemption in again so DC gov't is exempted from the shutdown.
As she so modestly announced  lol

https://norton.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/norton-provision-will-keep-dc-government-open-if-federal-government
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 04, 2021, 12:59:19 PM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1467138576697724932?t=_Zyjraqs2a4jXoIu43zhRw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 04, 2021, 01:02:42 PM
Does she not know that cancer isn't contagious or does she know and she's just hoping no one else will figure that out?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 04, 2021, 01:25:20 PM
She is right about the obesity thing that's criminally underreported. 80% of hospitalizations are either overweight or obese.

Of course covid is also 1000x easier to fight than obesity
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 04, 2021, 01:51:04 PM
Does she not know that cancer isn't contagious or does she know and she's just hoping no one else will figure that out?
She doesn't know anything.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on December 04, 2021, 03:18:17 PM
https://twitter.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1467197523127422979?t=1Itujt_QvuvgUus3i4Fetw&s=19

Look at this freaking asshat
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 04, 2021, 03:24:13 PM
Don't blame your misguided, yet obvious racism on me

I'm not the one that's dropped racial epithets in here, stupid.

https://twitter.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1467197523127422979?t=1Itujt_QvuvgUus3i4Fetw&s=19

Look at this freaking asshat

LMAO cry harder.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 04, 2021, 03:27:58 PM
https://twitter.com/RepThomasMassie/status/1467197523127422979?t=1Itujt_QvuvgUus3i4Fetw&s=19

Look at this freaking asshat

Never been hunting, but I'm fairly confident that none of those guns have any use whatsoever for hunting, nor are intended for self defense. Maybe the shotgun.

Also is that little girl holding some variation of a freaking uzi?

Ah, he lives in Kentucky and is from WV. Say no more
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 04, 2021, 03:30:59 PM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1467138576697724932?t=_Zyjraqs2a4jXoIu43zhRw&s=19

Marjorie Taylor Greene is white trash - literally.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 04, 2021, 03:43:37 PM
She doesn't know anything.

History has shown she knows c0ck.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9246917/Marjorie-Taylor-Green-openly-cheated-husband-men-gym.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on December 04, 2021, 03:52:22 PM
I'm not the one that's dropped racial epithets in here, stupid.

LMAO cry harder.
I think we both know who the racist is on this board, whitey.


Not crying at all...I hope the little girl in the pic with the uzi shoots someone close to you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 04, 2021, 04:00:19 PM
Never been hunting, but I'm fairly confident that none of those guns have any use whatsoever for hunting, nor are intended for self defense. Maybe the shotgun.

Also is that little girl holding some variation of a freaking uzi?

Ah, he lives in Kentucky and is from WV. Say no more
They're virtue signaling.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 04, 2021, 04:15:38 PM
History has shown she knows c0ck.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9246917/Marjorie-Taylor-Green-openly-cheated-husband-men-gym.html
She probably fucked that up too.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 04, 2021, 05:40:00 PM
Not crying at all...I hope the little girl in the pic with the uzi shoots someone close to you.

Good thing there's a better shot of the next arby's run you go on causing a myocardial infarction. Which would result of course in absolutely nothing lost.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 05, 2021, 01:35:15 PM
Not crying at all...I hope the little girl in the pic with the uzi shoots someone close to you.
[/size]
Good thing there's a better shot of the next arby's run you go on causing a myocardial infarction. Which would result of course in absolutely nothing lost.

Merry Christmas you two  : )
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 06, 2021, 07:32:55 AM
Anyone else remember this?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Charles_Vacca
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 06, 2021, 07:39:04 AM
Anyone else remember this?

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Shooting_of_Charles_Vacca

First thing I thought if when I saw the little girl in the photo.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 08, 2021, 04:23:42 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/07/opinion/pearl-harbor-american-adversaries.amp.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 08, 2021, 01:48:50 PM
*ahem* LMAOOOOOOOO

https://twitter.com/AdamJSmithGA/status/1468612789786849286?t=QSnTCUduEjKzYhElXRheZg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 08, 2021, 08:03:01 PM
*ahem* LMAOOOOOOOO

https://twitter.com/AdamJSmithGA/status/1468612789786849286?t=QSnTCUduEjKzYhElXRheZg&s=19

Could've, would've, should've....that's nice ms. fat ankles now tell us how you'd freak up the current Ukraine situation you hawkdyke.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 08, 2021, 08:37:16 PM
Could've, would've, should've....that's nice ms. fat ankles now tell us how you'd freak up the current Ukraine situation you hawkdyke.
If she won in 2016 she would have lost to [insert Republican] in 2020.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 09, 2021, 08:44:57 AM
It absolutely rocks how easy this is

https://twitter.com/DrOz/status/1468672917093425161?t=AgP8IEE5Sf3siPDZQFIJyw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 09, 2021, 01:04:39 PM
https://twitter.com/imillhiser/status/1468987117963517960?s=20 (https://twitter.com/imillhiser/status/1468987117963517960?s=20)

Huh
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 09, 2021, 02:01:41 PM
*ahem* LMAOOOOOOOO

https://twitter.com/AdamJSmithGA/status/1468612789786849286?t=QSnTCUduEjKzYhElXRheZg&s=19

LOL what a freaking sociopath.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 09, 2021, 06:44:57 PM
Crazy how she went from holding all the DNCs balls in little jars to complete irrelevance from all things in America
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 09, 2021, 07:34:30 PM
Crazy how she went from holding all the DNCs balls in little jars to complete irrelevance from all things in America

Yeah it's called retiring.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 09, 2021, 09:17:59 PM
Crazy how she went from holding all the DNCs balls in little jars to complete irrelevance from all things in America
She still pitches in on occasionally trying to ratfuck progressives (with mixed results).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 12, 2021, 11:58:05 AM
Driving 1,000 miles a week to buy all the milk in Queens

https://twitter.com/Santos4Congress/status/1469545742780047365?t=awcq4712KT5rnBapdwoyMA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 15, 2021, 12:29:15 PM
Blue no matter who

https://twitter.com/mkraju/status/1471160845065465857?t=4tzLJmHarJv-Nd1pQPd7cA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 16, 2021, 02:55:17 PM
Something something mj

https://twitter.com/patriottakes/status/1471579905129426953?t=1sJQA8u5B67ZBgJ9StPrag&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 16, 2021, 03:02:37 PM
Something something mj

https://twitter.com/patriottakes/status/1471579905129426953?t=1sJQA8u5B67ZBgJ9StPrag&s=19

LMAOOOO I've never seen something so cringy that actually made me laugh.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 19, 2021, 09:17:17 AM
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1472572066633326601?t=O1DOVETRbv81bufaceMnsA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on December 19, 2021, 09:56:07 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211219/33a2b19fcb2c25f02911f3d4eedc9547.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 19, 2021, 11:08:35 AM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211219/33a2b19fcb2c25f02911f3d4eedc9547.jpg)

"Dad can I ask you a question?...it's about MB's cartoon..."
"Pay no mind to it....MB's living rent-free between Nancy Pelosi's funbags.."
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/a/a7/Elephants.jpg) 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 19, 2021, 11:53:48 AM
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1472614540919648266?t=sgR3PpHZVsKpLHcHJcoJmQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 19, 2021, 02:11:05 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20211219/33a2b19fcb2c25f02911f3d4eedc9547.jpg)

freaking LOL imagine finding any value in this stupidity.

https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1472614540919648266?t=sgR3PpHZVsKpLHcHJcoJmQ&s=19

The Maverick!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 20, 2021, 08:21:46 AM
Manchin thinks Americans are dumb pieces of excrement who can't be trusted to spend money on their own needs, but he's not an elitist because WV doesn't touch the Atlantic.

https://twitter.com/s_m_i/status/1472927211833413634?t=af2tPgH-hw_nRN1LEvHBKw&s=19

In b4 lolHuffPo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 20, 2021, 08:37:44 AM
Manchin thinks Americans are dumb pieces of excrement who can't be trusted to spend money on their own needs, but he's not an elitist because WV doesn't touch the Atlantic.

https://twitter.com/s_m_i/status/1472927211833413634?t=af2tPgH-hw_nRN1LEvHBKw&s=19

In b4 lolHuffPo

His state ranks the lowest or bear lowest in many of the areas the BBB programs are going to help. He really doesn't care about West Virginia.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 20, 2021, 09:32:21 AM
Manchin can do what he wants because the alternative to him in WV is.....who knows what.  He (and most politicians) doesn't give a excrement about his constituents unless it benefits him.  He can ride into Congress on giant dildo-shaped boat made of coal and bang Marjorie Taylor Greene in the corner and no one can do anything because he lucked his way into a power spot.  It is what it is and nothing will be change until the midterms.  Once the Republicans regain either the House or Senate or both, Manchin's hillbilly derriere becomes a nobody again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on December 20, 2021, 09:56:52 AM
Manchin can do what he wants because the alternative to him in WV is.....who knows what.  He (and most politicians) doesn't give a excrement about his constituents unless it benefits him.  He can ride into Congress on giant dildo-shaped boat made of coal and bang Marjorie Taylor Greene in the corner and no one can do anything because he lucked his way into a power spot.  It is what it is and nothing will be change until the midterms.  Once the Republicans regain either the House or Senate or both, Manchin's hillbilly derriere becomes a nobody again.


Maaaaaaan chin.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 20, 2021, 12:46:26 PM
Manchin can do what he wants because the alternative to him in WV is.....who knows what.  He (and most politicians) doesn't give a excrement about his constituents unless it benefits him.  He can ride into Congress on giant dildo-shaped boat made of coal and bang Marjorie Taylor Greene in the corner and no one can do anything because he lucked his way into a power spot.  It is what it is and nothing will be change until the midterms.  Once the Republicans regain either the House or Senate or both, Manchin's hillbilly derriere becomes a nobody again.

I heard this morning that WV’s 3-to-1 against the Better Build Bill and that was a quote from an MSNBC ‘morning joe’ panelist.  As for Marjorie Taylor-Green & the Dildo-Shaped Boat, I’ll pass….she strikes me as stinky where it counts.  Smelly girl.  Dirty girl.  Bad girl.

*reaching for meds*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 20, 2021, 03:58:05 PM
Manchin thinks Americans are dumb pieces of excrement who can't be trusted to spend money on their own needs, but he's not an elitist because WV doesn't touch the Atlantic.

https://twitter.com/s_m_i/status/1472927211833413634?t=af2tPgH-hw_nRN1LEvHBKw&s=19

In b4 lolHuffPo

Americans are dumb pieces of excrement who can't be trusted to spend money on their own needs.

IIRC many people were shocked at how many people saved some of the stimulus money instead of running out and buying an iPhone or something retarded
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 20, 2021, 05:32:13 PM


I heard this morning that WV’s 3-to-1 against the Better Build Bill and that was a quote from an MSNBC ‘morning joe’ panelist.

That's a stretch. It's one of those things where you get a wildly different response if you ask about "Biden's Build Back Better" vs describing what's actually contained in the bill. The latter always polls better.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 21, 2021, 12:03:08 AM

That's a stretch. It's one of those things where you get a wildly different response if you ask about "Biden's Build Back Better" vs describing what's actually contained in the bill. The latter always polls better.

Stretch?  Fwiw, that IS what I heard this morning, on MSNBC, on Morning Joe and I simply repeated what I heard on the tube in answer to Bo's contention that "Manchin (and most politicians) doesn't give a excrement about his constituents unless it benefits him."   

https://twitter.com/BetteMidler/status/1472955243935711236

edit: oops.... :-)   https://twitter.com/BetteMidler/status/1472964848875188226

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 21, 2021, 08:12:00 AM
Stretch?  Fwiw, that IS what I heard this morning, on MSNBC, on Morning Joe and I simply repeated what I heard on the tube in answer to Bo's contention that "Manchin (and most politicians) doesn't give a excrement about his constituents unless it benefits him."   

https://twitter.com/BetteMidler/status/1472955243935711236

edit: oops.... :-)   https://twitter.com/BetteMidler/status/1472964848875188226
I meant the panelist's claim is dubious.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on December 23, 2021, 04:57:42 PM
(https://preview.redd.it/bhqvot2dk6781.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=309c86cf822eab05a2970fa0004ce4c03852382e)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 23, 2021, 05:37:39 PM
Tell me that's not real, please.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on December 23, 2021, 06:20:44 PM
Tell me that's not real, please.

Here's his signature, from his wikipedia page:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Signature_of_Madison_Cawthorn.png)

Madison Cauthon.  Dude can't even spell his name correctly. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 23, 2021, 06:36:46 PM
Average anti-CRT crusader

https://twitter.com/metrotimes/status/1474033636022394890?t=wlEkhf0jS94jTxjq3Z_rag&s=19

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 23, 2021, 07:32:13 PM
Here's his signature, from his wikipedia page:

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/86/Signature_of_Madison_Cawthorn.png)

Madison Cauthon.  Dude can't even spell his name correctly. 

I did a quick google and the suggestion is that he writes like a 9 year old in part because of his disability, in which case it seems a bit off to knock him for it. Especially when there are so many other bigger reasons why he is such a worthless queynte.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on December 23, 2021, 07:40:07 PM
I did a quick google and the suggestion is that he writes like a 9 year old in part because of his disability, in which case it seems a bit off to knock him for it. Especially when there are so many other bigger reasons why he is such a worthless queynte.

Fair enough.  freak Madison Cawthorn for all reasons aside from his penmanship. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 23, 2021, 08:43:32 PM
Fair enough.  freak Madison Cawthorn for all reasons aside from his penmanship. 

A really good reason is his photo op at the Shooting range where he's flagging multiple people in his group, shooting dual handguns with his eyes closed and a camera man stationed forward of the barrell.

Also, how much he likes bringing up a second civil war as a possibility.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on December 26, 2021, 10:33:39 AM
(https://i.redd.it/6l0zpqtpfv781.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 27, 2021, 06:26:39 PM
Republicans are anti-voting

https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/1475542595673763848?t=IVYt0EDcVozIJje4GSf43g&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 27, 2021, 07:39:01 PM
Republicans are anti-voting

https://twitter.com/RandPaul/status/1475542595673763848?t=IVYt0EDcVozIJje4GSf43g&s=19

So his complaint is that it was made too easy for American citizens to legally cast a vote?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 27, 2021, 08:09:43 PM
So his complaint is that it was made too easy for American citizens to legally cast a vote?

Yes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 28, 2021, 08:13:08 PM
https://twitter.com/grantstern/status/1475333300722057221?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 29, 2021, 10:43:27 AM
https://twitter.com/JoshMandelOhio/status/1475617544643952651?t=EtqXZUsYavYVWa1Z7it-xg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 29, 2021, 11:13:17 AM
https://twitter.com/JoshMandelOhio/status/1475617544643952651?t=EtqXZUsYavYVWa1Z7it-xg&s=19

God loves bitcoin.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 29, 2021, 10:32:03 PM
dafuq
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 29, 2021, 10:33:10 PM
dafuq
You wouldn't understand, you're a coastal elitist. Real America loves Bitcoin.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 29, 2021, 11:14:58 PM
You wouldn't understand, you're a coastal elitist. Real America loves Bitcoin.

Sir, this is an El Salvador.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 30, 2021, 01:20:42 PM
Sir, this is an El Salvador.
No, it's a Cheescake Factory

https://twitter.com/JoshMandelOhio/status/1476555380159361028?t=c8Cs6-kDZrvwy6XNq9Le_Q&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 31, 2021, 01:37:12 PM
https://theintercept.com/2021/12/31/democrats-biden-2021-failures/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 02, 2022, 09:57:32 AM
Nooooo

https://twitter.com/daveyalba/status/1477646895849877504?t=beOaTqTCtYDhL_WxfA7ciw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 02, 2022, 09:58:41 AM
Justice has been served
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 02, 2022, 10:06:58 AM
Justice has been served
This is exactly like 1946
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 09, 2022, 06:58:59 PM
https://nypost.com/2022/01/08/jon-ossoff-could-snub-nancy-pelosi-with-ban-on-congress-stock-trades/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 09, 2022, 07:14:33 PM
kumbaya

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/one-small-step-storycorps-60-minutes-2021-01-09/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 09, 2022, 09:36:10 PM
LFG

(https://i.redd.it/rflq0oc8mqa81.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 12, 2022, 10:33:32 AM
After deep thought I've decided I want to see Kamala and Hillary face off in the 2024 primary. That should be the last straw in breaking everyone's brain.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 12, 2022, 12:22:27 PM
After deep thought I've decided I want to see Kamala and Hillary face off in the 2024 primary. That should be the last straw in breaking everyone's brain.
You overestimate the brain.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 12, 2022, 12:24:10 PM
Nooooo

https://twitter.com/daveyalba/status/1477646895849877504?t=beOaTqTCtYDhL_WxfA7ciw&s=19

Damn as much as I hate her she’s pretty entertaining

Some of the worst takes I’ve ever seen in my life, all coming from her within a 1 year span
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 12, 2022, 12:25:06 PM
You overestimate the brain.

I agree, there would be so many people finding a way to cheerlead this
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 12, 2022, 12:28:29 PM
Fweedom!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 12, 2022, 12:33:54 PM
Damn as much as I hate her she’s pretty entertaining

Some of the worst takes I’ve ever seen in my life, all coming from her within a 1 year span

The world did not need her in the collective consciousness.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 12, 2022, 01:08:06 PM
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1481230999581298691?s=21

My favorite time of year
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 12, 2022, 01:09:21 PM
From the replies

“Hey why is this midterm year so challenging? What choices were made that caused this midterm to be so challenging?”

lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 13, 2022, 07:22:39 AM
Shutthefuckupshutthefuckupshutthefuckup

https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1481323590733774856?t=Xx4W441uOqzMzS1VWVwILg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 13, 2022, 07:25:00 AM
Shutthefuckupshutthefuckupshutthefuckup

https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1481323590733774856?t=Xx4W441uOqzMzS1VWVwILg&s=19
Manchin/Marjorie 2024
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 13, 2022, 07:32:08 AM
Manchin/Marjorie 2024
Michelle Obama/David Duke 2024
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 13, 2022, 07:35:44 AM
Michelle Obama/David Duke 2024
You win this battle.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 13, 2022, 08:36:53 AM
Oh?

https://twitter.com/matthewstoller/status/1481631828146630656?t=ET5dGtHgBFtujoI9b-k7BA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 14, 2022, 09:22:17 AM
Amazing how no one seems to appreciate a maverick senator willing to put country over party from Arizona anymore.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 14, 2022, 12:58:08 PM
A staggering absence of self-awareness.

https://twitter.com/HillaryClinton/status/1482035323853066245?t=TWGidatIQtOr_HbzbU5fGg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 15, 2022, 10:08:58 PM
Dan Bagina has been 1984'd
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 17, 2022, 06:59:57 AM
This guy had some good ideas

https://twitter.com/DarrigoMelanie/status/1483058018858188801?t=lt0H8C0r65JdP91FX7t_fQ&s=19

Unfortunately someone is going to claim MLK would be an opponent of CRT today.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 17, 2022, 10:47:13 AM

This guy had some good ideas

https://twitter.com/DarrigoMelanie/status/1483058018858188801?t=lt0H8C0r65JdP91FX7t_fQ&s=19

Unfortunately someone is going to claim MLK would be an opponent of CRT today.

    ; )

   Beautiful little baby
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/96/HR_Democrats_035_%2810777719323%29.jpg/231px-HR_Democrats_035_%2810777719323%29.jpg)

   Racist little motherfucKKKer
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/ba/July_Fourth_Celebration_%2820073343708%29.jpg/320px-July_Fourth_Celebration_%2820073343708%29.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 17, 2022, 11:35:58 AM
“The evils of capitalism are as real as the evils of militarism and racism. The problems of racial injustice and economic injustice cannot be solved without a radical redistribution of political and economic power” - MLK

"If you hear a teacher discussed the existence of racism with students, you need lose your mind and throw the biggest shitfit the nation has ever seen" - MLK, probably
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 17, 2022, 12:03:57 PM
A woman can have a smile, and a woman can have a large backside, but I have been to the mountain and I am here to tell you that when a woman has both of those things she is not to be trusted. — Rev. Martin Luther King, Jr.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 17, 2022, 11:16:26 PM
Ronnie D and Orange Man having a bit of a spat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 18, 2022, 08:13:58 AM
Quote
NEW: Donald Trump is trashing Ron DeSantis in private as an ingrate with a "dull personality" and no realistic chance of beating him in a potential 2024 showdown, sources who've recently talked to the former president about the Florida governor tell Axios.

Donnie never misses
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 18, 2022, 08:15:22 AM
1) Ingrate ✅
2) Dull with no personality ✅
3) Zero shot of beating Trump ✅
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 18, 2022, 08:16:11 AM
Donnie never misses

please don't vote that poopchute back into the white house.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 18, 2022, 06:12:58 PM
please don't vote that poopchute back into the white house.

I'd love to see the tears of arby's gravy running along those cherub cheeks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 18, 2022, 07:44:44 PM
I'd love to see the tears of arby's gravy running along those cherub cheeks.
Keep suckin that orange peepee
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 18, 2022, 07:51:22 PM
I'd love to see the tears of arby's gravy running along those cherub cheeks.

Carrotface is the last thing this country needs.  The United States of Goober's cult of personality.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 18, 2022, 10:19:57 PM
https://twitter.com/ronfilipkowski/status/1477359368060424192?s=21

Holy excrement this chick is real I thought she was a meme account
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 18, 2022, 10:34:03 PM
https://twitter.com/garychambersjr/status/1483424500712673283?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 19, 2022, 06:31:19 AM
When you definitely understand words and reality:

(https://i.redd.it/z0xdr72d6ic81.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 19, 2022, 07:43:10 AM
Coach Saban down for the cause.

https://www.businessinsider.com/alabama-coach-nick-saban-urges-manchin-to-support-voting-rights-2022-1?amp (https://www.businessinsider.com/alabama-coach-nick-saban-urges-manchin-to-support-voting-rights-2022-1?amp)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 19, 2022, 08:30:55 AM
Coach Saban down for the cause.

https://www.businessinsider.com/alabama-coach-nick-saban-urges-manchin-to-support-voting-rights-2022-1?amp (https://www.businessinsider.com/alabama-coach-nick-saban-urges-manchin-to-support-voting-rights-2022-1?amp)

So run for office then. Easy flip of Alabama to a blue state.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 19, 2022, 08:35:34 AM
So run for office then. Easy flip of Alabama to a blue state.
Tuberville isn't up for re-election until 2026.

Shelby is up this year but that's not as funny.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 19, 2022, 02:14:11 PM
Keep suckin that orange peepee

lol, nice projection. So basic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 19, 2022, 02:34:06 PM
lol, nice projection. So basic.

(https://scontent-sjc3-1.xx.fbcdn.net/v/t1.15752-9/271723152_618330925947375_8622532155307957507_n.jpg?_nc_cat=108&ccb=1-5&_nc_sid=ae9488&_nc_ohc=0bXx2PrW5nMAX-RKaul&_nc_ht=scontent-sjc3-1.xx&oh=03_AVKrlKwvKzXvRkiubJNEvoJ8CSQMURVPeZxEs8p6IuA-Gw&oe=620EB87A)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 19, 2022, 11:12:29 PM
https://twitter.com/RonJohnsonWI/status/1483521588876222480?t=cJeVeG7LO_rk4PvZClE48Q&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 20, 2022, 12:30:17 AM
Coach Saban down for the cause.

https://www.businessinsider.com/alabama-coach-nick-saban-urges-manchin-to-support-voting-rights-2022-1?amp (https://www.businessinsider.com/alabama-coach-nick-saban-urges-manchin-to-support-voting-rights-2022-1?amp)

Call me cynical but St. Nick also knows that it can only help with recruiting in AA circles
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 20, 2022, 07:23:23 AM
Call me cynical but St. Nick also knows that it can only help with recruiting in AA circles
I'd agree if Saban was donning kente cloth and kneeling for photos but supporting voting rights is so obviously the correct side here that it seems unnecessary to be suspicious.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 20, 2022, 01:34:32 PM
I'd agree if Saban was donning kente cloth and kneeling for photos but supporting voting rights is so obviously the correct side here that it seems unnecessary to be suspicious.
True but I said "in AA circles" so Ghanatta here with that donning kente cloth shlate  ; )
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 20, 2022, 06:27:10 PM
freak Mitch. That is all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 21, 2022, 06:50:46 PM
Love my maverick from Arizona. Country over party, every time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 21, 2022, 07:02:55 PM
Love my maverick from Arizona. Country over party, every time.
This is almost as fresh and funny as let's go Brandon.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 21, 2022, 07:20:55 PM
This is almost as fresh and funny as let's go Brandon.

It's not meant to be fresh or funny.

It's semi serious because I'm in favor of her resisting a disgusting, authoritarian power grab, (and as I've said before I find her hot AF), but also is clearly meant to highlight the absurd, clearly disparate, and at times flat out violent (Robert Reich over here saying how democrats should show her the back of their hands) treatment she's receiving as opposed to John "he was a racist when he ran against Obama, now he's our hero" McCain.

freak Joe Biden.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 21, 2022, 07:22:35 PM
Blocking voting equality FTW!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 21, 2022, 07:34:08 PM
(https://i.imgflip.com/627iyb.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 21, 2022, 08:06:27 PM
Blocking voting equality FTW!

Lmao. "voting equality." I'll never be one to discount or not credit the machine behind them, the Yamiche Alcindor's and other flagrant propagandists who do a phenomenal job of coming up with non-applicable buzzterms to try to make a craven hijacking of power actually virtuous. The right is so far behind in this regard it's not even funny.

(https://i.imgflip.com/627iyb.jpg)

Yes!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 21, 2022, 11:19:21 PM
You're right, Republicans are just anti-voting. No need to throw the word equality in there.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 21, 2022, 11:39:54 PM
You're right, Republicans are just anti-voting. No need to throw the word equality in there.

My bad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 21, 2022, 11:52:03 PM


Yes!

You do know that's not a good thing, right?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 22, 2022, 01:25:14 AM

You do know that's not a good thing, right?

You do know that meme could easily be flipped, right?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2022, 04:10:32 PM
You do know that meme could easily be flipped, right?



Eh, not really. Even the most moderate Republicans don't get lauded for putting country ahead of party by Democrat voters.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2022, 04:12:39 PM
This seems like good news on a number of levels.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/intel-plans-new-chip-manufacturing-site-ohio-report-2022-01-21/

Interesting that we all shipped semiconductor manufacture overseas in the last two decades (the company I spent 14 years working for in the UK and Canada at one time manufactured its own chipsets before spinning that part of the business off and buying in chips from the Far East) and now we're trying desperately to rebuild it domestically.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 22, 2022, 04:42:30 PM
MJ's crush censured by Arizona Democratic Party

https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sinema-faces-democratic-party-backlash-blocking-voting-rights/story?id=82375185 (https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/sinema-faces-democratic-party-backlash-blocking-voting-rights/story?id=82375185)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 22, 2022, 04:59:53 PM
This seems like good news on a number of levels.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/intel-plans-new-chip-manufacturing-site-ohio-report-2022-01-21/

Interesting that we all shipped semiconductor manufacture overseas in the last two decades (the company I spent 14 years working for in the UK and Canada at one time manufactured its own chipsets before spinning that part of the business off and buying in chips from the Far East) and now we're trying desperately to rebuild it domestically.

It sure does.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a9/Joe_Biden_kickoff_rally_May_2019.jpg/269px-Joe_Biden_kickoff_rally_May_2019.jpg)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/Intel_C4004.jpg/320px-Intel_C4004.jpg)
(http://[img][quote author=Johnny English link=topic=135.msg460865#msg460865 date=1642889559]
This seems like good news on a number of levels.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/intel-plans-new-chip-manufacturing-site-ohio-report-2022-01-21/

Interesting that we all shipped semiconductor manufacture overseas in the last two decades (the company I spent 14 years working for in the UK and Canada at one time manufactured its own chipsets before spinning that part of the business off and buying in chips from the Far East) and now we're trying desperately to rebuild it domestically.
[/quote]

It sure does.

[img width=269 height=240]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a9/Joe_Biden_kickoff_rally_May_2019.jpg/269px-Joe_Biden_kickoff_rally_May_2019.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/Intel_C4004.jpg/320px-Intel_C4004.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/67/Jill_Biden_-_48244028912.jpg/320px-Jill_Biden_-_48244028912.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2022, 05:02:07 PM
Biden created the chip shortage by putting them in vaccines and forcing people to take them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 22, 2022, 05:05:14 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Kamala_Harris_oath_of_office.jpg/320px-Kamala_Harris_oath_of_office.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d3/2020-07-22_10_42_38_A_bag_of_Lay%27s_Salt_and_Vinegar_Flavored_Potato_Chips_in_the_Dulles_section_of_Sterling%2C_Loudoun_County%2C_Virginia.jpg/180px-2020-07-22_10_42_38_A_bag_of_Lay%27s_Salt_and_Vinegar_Flavored_Potato_Chips_in_the_Dulles_section_of_Sterling%2C_Loudoun_County%2C_Virginia.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ae/Willie_Brown_%2847998148102%29.jpg/320px-Willie_Brown_%2847998148102%29.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 22, 2022, 05:07:41 PM
Biden created the chip shortage by putting them in vaccines and forcing people to take them.
He did not - cut the chip

in any event, good news
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 22, 2022, 06:53:44 PM
This seems like good news on a number of levels.

https://www.reuters.com/technology/intel-plans-new-chip-manufacturing-site-ohio-report-2022-01-21/

Interesting that we all shipped semiconductor manufacture overseas in the last two decades (the company I spent 14 years working for in the UK and Canada at one time manufactured its own chipsets before spinning that part of the business off and buying in chips from the Far East) and now we're trying desperately to rebuild it domestically.

Isn't the issue still going to be precious metal's which are incredibly expensive and hard to come by.

I know China has one of the biggest mining operations in the world for that excrement, so regardless of us building chips here all the components are coming from overseas.

The biggest problem is that the largest untapped source of rare precious metals for microchips in the world happens to be in Afghanistan. And I believe some queynte handed that country to the Taliban who has been in negotiations with China about exploiting their literal trillions of dollars in precious metals.

So effectively buying electronics will be funding global terrorism as well as the rape, tortures, and murders of countless women.

But at least we will be making microchips in Ohio 🤷
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2022, 07:07:25 PM
Isn't the issue still going to be precious metal's which are incredibly expensive and hard to come by.

I know China has one of the biggest mining operations in the world for that excrement, so regardless of us building chips here all the components are coming from overseas.

The biggest problem is that the largest untapped source of rare precious metals for microchips in the world happens to be in Afghanistan. And I believe some queynte handed that country to the Taliban who has been in negotiations with China about exploiting their literal trillions of dollars in precious metals.

So effectively buying electronics will be funding global terrorism as well as the rape, tortures, and murders of countless women.

But at least we will be making microchips in Ohio 🤷

All of the minerals needed for the production of chips are found in the Americas. The problem is that mining is dangerous and messy, which makes it expensive, and China has historically been less fussy about things like worker safety and environmental impacts. There's no reason that semiconductors can't be manufactured at scale in North America though, it just might be slightly less profitable. I imagine that Intel and others are now considering that a worthwhile trade off to reduce other risk factors that are apparent these days.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 22, 2022, 07:14:43 PM
All of the minerals needed for the production of chips are found in the Americas. The problem is that mining is dangerous and messy, which makes it expensive, and China has historically been less fussy about things like worker safety and environmental impacts. There's no reason that semiconductors can't be manufactured at scale in North America though, it just might be slightly less profitable. I imagine that Intel and others are now considering that a worthwhile trade off to reduce other risk factors that are apparent these days.

I don't know anything about the process of harvesting and mining precious minerals. But can it be done using wind power and canola oil or whatever the freak source of energy is trendy these days?

I have to imagine that this process would not be popular with the people in power.

And again nothing changes the fact that a terrorist organization that  attacked NYC now controls the world's largest source of precious metals needed to manufacture these chips.

Is it too late to elect Dick Cheney? freak Iraqs oil, we want Afghanistans precious minerals
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2022, 07:23:17 PM
I don't know anything about the process of harvesting and mining precious minerals. But can it be done using wind power and canola oil or whatever the freak source of energy is trendy these days?

I have to imagine that this process would not be popular with the people in power.

And again nothing changes the fact that a terrorist organization that  attacked NYC now controls the world's largest source of precious metals needed to manufacture these chips.

Is it too late to elect Dick Cheney? freak Iraqs oil, we want Afghanistans precious minerals

Mostly it's Alaska, Canada and South America. You're not going to have to ask permission to dig up the Bay Area to get germanium. But to answer your question, yes. Sustainable energy sources are a terrific idea.

I'm not sure why you're so hung up on Afghanistan. Are you actually upset that US forces didn't remain there indefinitely in order for you to have a slightly cheaper GPU?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 22, 2022, 07:30:06 PM
I just enjoy how producing our own goods can't just be sold on its merits and has to be framed as competition with China. DeSantis did the same thing with his weird rambling announcement of signing a FL bill into law.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 22, 2022, 07:33:27 PM
Mostly it's Alaska, Canada and South America. You're not going to have to ask permission to dig up the Bay Area to get germanium. But to answer your question, yes. Sustainable energy sources are a terrific idea.

I'm not sure why you're so hung up on Afghanistan. Are you actually upset that US forces didn't remain there indefinitely in order for you to have a slightly cheaper GPU?

Because you're praising the administration for this microchip nonsense, when they made microchips potentially the biggest source of revenue for global terrorism.

Having China get into Afghanistan probably makes microchips cheaper globally than if other countries were (as other countries wouldn't resort to china's level of exploitation presumably)

So no this isn't a Afghanistan situation bad because I want to save a few bucks.

This is Afghanistan bad, because I think the organization responsible for blowing up buildings in NYC getting TRILLIONS of dollars is a very bad thing, as that revenue will almost certainly be used to do bad things world wide
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2022, 07:35:12 PM
Because you're praising the administration for this microchip nonsense, when they made microchips potentially the biggest source of revenue for global terrorism.

Having China get into Afghanistan probably makes microchips cheaper globally than if other countries were (as other countries wouldn't resort to china's level of exploitation presumably)

So no this isn't a Afghanistan situation bad because I want to save a few bucks.

This is Afghanistan bad, because I think the organization responsible for blowing up buildings in NYC getting TRILLIONS of dollars is a very bad thing.

I haven't said a single word about the administration other than a joke about Biden putting chips in vaccines. Appreciate you're looking for a scrap but this ain't it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2022, 07:36:58 PM
I just enjoy how producing our own goods can't just be sold on its merits and has to be framed as competition with China. DeSantis did the same thing with his weird rambling announcement of signing a FL bill into law.

I don't know that I'd even especially see it as competition with China so much as removing dependencies on global supply chains that have demonstrated their fragility in the last couple of years.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 22, 2022, 07:39:39 PM


(as other countries wouldn't resort to china's level of exploitation presumably)

Of course not. Now I'm gonna take a really big sip of water and open any book about underdeveloped resource-rich countries...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 22, 2022, 07:40:44 PM
I haven't said a single word about the administration other than a joke about Biden putting chips in vaccines. Appreciate you're looking for a scrap but this ain't it.

The article you posted (which started off about Intel) went off on a tangent about Pelosi and Biden doing all these great things to increase chip production.

I assumed that was part of your praise as much as the Intel thing.

I probably was more argumentative than I would have liked. My bad
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 22, 2022, 07:42:36 PM

Of course not. Now I'm gonna take a really big sip of water and open any book about underdeveloped resource-rich countries...

I'm not delusional enough to pretend that other countries aren't exploitative of resource rich underdev countries. I just think China holds the title
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2022, 07:45:25 PM
The article you posted (which started off about Intel) went off on a tangent about Pelosi and Biden doing all these great things to increase chip production.

I assumed that was part of your praise as much as the Intel thing.

I probably was more argumentative than I would have liked. My bad

Don't know that I even read that far in it. I'm sure it suits them that it's going into an important swing state, but I'm generally a big fan of high quality jobs like this and if Trump had done it I'd have praised him too. This is exactly the sort of manufacturing facility that the Rust Belt should be looking to develop, I don't think anyone with any awareness expects everyone to learn to code but doubling down on coal mining and steel production isn't helpful either. Heavy industry will always exist and always have a role, but skilled manufacturing of high tech that the US is already really good at designing is exactly the right direction to be heading IMO.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 22, 2022, 07:50:57 PM
I'm not delusional enough to pretend that other countries aren't exploitative of resource rich underdev countries. I just think China holds the title
That explains why so many of these countries prefer to do business with China now.

https://www.visualcapitalist.com/china-u-s-worlds-trading-partner/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 22, 2022, 07:53:07 PM
Don't know that I even read that far in it. I'm sure it suits them that it's going into an important swing state, but I'm generally a big fan of high quality jobs like this and if Trump had done it I'd have praised him too. This is exactly the sort of manufacturing facility that the Rust Belt should be looking to develop, I don't think anyone with any awareness expects everyone to learn to code but doubling down on coal mining and steel production isn't helpful either. Heavy industry will always exist and always have a role, but skilled manufacturing of high tech that the US is already really good at designing is exactly the right direction to be heading IMO.

Again don't know anything about chip manufacturers but is this skilled manufacturing?

Looking at things like automobiles (or basically anything else fancy) I'm not a fan of buying American because places like Japan or Korea will usually do a better job.

excrement I want made in America is like food. Idk maybe I'm just an poopchute but I have no confidence in American manufacturing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 22, 2022, 08:03:12 PM
Again don't know anything about chip manufacturers but is this skilled manufacturing?

Looking at things like automobiles (or basically anything else fancy) I'm not a fan of buying American because places like Japan or Korea will usually do a better job.

excrement I want made in America is like food. Idk maybe I'm just an poopchute but I have no confidence in American manufacturing.

Yes, it is relatively skilled. It's a process like any other, they're not hand carving the chips and stamping the builder's signature on them at the end like a Bentley but nor is it something that you'd give to a bunch of guys you picked up from a Home Depot parking lot. It's the kind of good quality manufacturing work we should be trying to do more of.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 22, 2022, 08:04:36 PM
Yes, it is relatively skilled. It's a process like any other, they're not hand carving the chips and stamping the builder's signature on them at the end like a Bentley but nor is it something that you'd give to a bunch of guys you picked up from a Home Depot parking lot. It's the kind of good quality manufacturing work we should be trying to do more of.

I can support this then
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 23, 2022, 11:13:21 AM
The article you posted (which started off about Intel) went off on a tangent about

 Pelosi and Biden doing all these great things to increase chip production.


Nancy Pelosi and micro anything doesn't add up

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/63/A_girl_with_her_big_tits.jpg/320px-A_girl_with_her_big_tits.jpg)


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on January 24, 2022, 04:32:04 PM
https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1485739301685972992
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 24, 2022, 04:40:50 PM
https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1485739301685972992

LMAO remember when this sorry sack of excrement ran on uniting the country?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 24, 2022, 04:45:02 PM
LMAO remember when this sorry sack of excrement ran on uniting the country?

Is it better to run on uniting the country and not mean it, or to run on dividing it and really mean it?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 24, 2022, 05:21:56 PM
Is it better to run on uniting the country and not mean it, or to run on dividing it and really mean it?

Idk, ask him he was the one spewing that stupid excrement.

Something, something, our free press is under attack, this is the stuff of fascists.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 24, 2022, 05:37:28 PM
Uh oh, this sounds concerning.

(https://i.imgur.com/dpT3YyV.png)

It does seem like a supremacist regime with a built in time limit though, for reasons that should be obvious.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 24, 2022, 05:41:12 PM
Uh oh, this sounds concerning.

(https://i.imgur.com/dpT3YyV.png)

It does seem like a supremacist regime with a built in time limit though, for reasons that should be obvious.
Once you get infected with the gay, the devil gives you supernatural to shoot sperm into the wind that laser targets lesbian ovaries.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 24, 2022, 06:36:17 PM
Once you get infected with the gay, the devil gives you supernatural to shoot sperm into the wind that laser targets lesbian ovaries.

Are homosexual supremacists all members of the GayGayGay? I bet their hooded gowns are fabulous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on January 24, 2022, 07:09:32 PM
https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1485781365702500361
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 24, 2022, 07:11:21 PM
https://twitter.com/kaitlancollins/status/1485781365702500361

https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1485780524715151362

https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1485771377135206407

https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1485769250551832576

https://twitter.com/DefiantLs/status/1485758945981521922

DefiantL's really has become the best account on twitter.

Anyway, the lack of solidarity with Doocy from the same press that circled the wagons every time Acosta soccer dove when getting pushed by Trump should be surprising to absolutely no one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 25, 2022, 04:26:12 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/25/us/san-jose-gun-law/index.html

Good
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 25, 2022, 04:33:23 PM
https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1486102089067638784?t=ebM-xq12j_cnH3XbsXB6dg&s=19

Bad
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 25, 2022, 04:49:31 PM
https://twitter.com/Reuters/status/1486102089067638784?t=ebM-xq12j_cnH3XbsXB6dg&s=19

Bad
Dem titties doe
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 26, 2022, 11:07:36 AM
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/justice-stephen-breyer-retire-supreme-court-paving-way-biden-appointment-n1288042
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 26, 2022, 11:11:18 AM
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/supreme-court/justice-stephen-breyer-retire-supreme-court-paving-way-biden-appointment-n1288042

I have no doubt that the Republicans will find ways to delay and obfuscate until such time as they have the ability to put David Duke on the court.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 12:17:17 PM
I have no doubt that the Republicans will find ways to delay and obfuscate until such time as they have the ability to put David Duke on the court.

Dubya did manage to put the guy who appears to be the most upstanding and reasonable dude on the court.

It'll be interesting to see if Biden goes out and trys to hire the best (liberal) dude for the job. Or if he goes all out and nominates some crazy wackjob
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 26, 2022, 12:20:38 PM
Dubya did manage to put the guy who appears to be the most upstanding and reasonable dude on the court.

It'll be interesting to see if Biden goes out and trys to hire the best (liberal) dude for the job. Or if he goes all out and nominates some crazy wackjob

From the linked article:

Quote
Biden promised on the campaign trail to nominate a Black woman to the court.

.......

Among likely contenders are U.S. Circuit Judge Ketanji Brown Jackson of the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia, a former Breyer law clerk; and Leondra Kruger, a justice on California’s Supreme Court.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 12:22:19 PM
From the linked article:


Ah yes I completley forgot

This is going to be an affirmative action pick. We all see how well that worked out with Kamala
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 26, 2022, 12:29:40 PM
Ah yes I completley forgot

This is going to be an affirmative action pick. We all see how well that worked out with Kamala

Just have him nominate President Obama and watch them completely melt down.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 26, 2022, 12:33:38 PM
Just have him nominate President Obama and watch them completely melt down.
Justice George Soros.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 12:44:38 PM
Justice George Soros.

I don't think conservatives would complain if Biden nominated a 91 year old man
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 12:45:04 PM
Just have him nominate President Obama and watch them completely melt down.

Is he identifying as a women these days?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 26, 2022, 12:48:26 PM
Is he identifying as a women these days?

Do you think Republicans would hate him more if he did?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 12:50:00 PM
Do you think Republicans would hate him more if he did?

I certainly don't represent the right, but I think as far as liberal nominees go Obama wouldn't be a terrible one (his wife would be)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 12:52:06 PM
I do find it increasingly amusing that the latest big national issue the supreme court has taken on is an affirmative action case which could have major implications on affirmative action in this country.

And at the same time their newest nominee getting nominated purely because of affirmative action
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 26, 2022, 01:22:03 PM
I do find it increasingly amusing that the latest big national issue the supreme court has taken on is an affirmative action case which could have major implications on affirmative action in this country.

And at the same time their newest nominee getting nominated purely because of affirmative action

What do you consider to be the primary reason there has never been a black woman supreme court justice out of over 100 in US history? And the primary reason that 7/9 justices are white? And the primary reason that with 7/9 non-white justices, this is the most diverse the supreme court has ever been? Are you whites biologically superior or is it just that non whites are still so structurally disadvantaged that they are unlikely to ever be qualified?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 26, 2022, 01:42:54 PM
Dubya did manage to put the guy who appears to be the most upstanding and reasonable dude on the court.

It'll be interesting to see if Biden goes out and trys to hire the best (liberal) dude for the job. Or if he goes all out and nominates some crazy wackjob
He's going to nominate a milquetoast liberal judge and Republicans will act as if she's Assata Shakur.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 01:59:43 PM
What do you consider to be the primary reason there has never been a black woman supreme court justice out of over 100 in US history? And the primary reason that 7/9 justices are white? And the primary reason that with 7/9 non-white justices, this is the most diverse the supreme court has ever been? Are you whites biologically superior or is it just that non whites are still so structurally disadvantaged that they are unlikely to ever be qualified?

For the sake of argument let's say you are 100% correct that they're structurally disadvantaged.

Is the solution to pick someone who isn't the most qualified for the job based on their race and gender?

I know people use this bullshit argument that there's numerous people that are just as qualified so use other criteria. Well look at sports, every QB is in the top 99.999 percentile of talented QB's in the world. Yet the difference between a top QB and a bottom tier QB is light years apart.

You're a Democrat president, pick a liberal justice. That's perfectly appropriate. But to make the single most important criteria for your nominee be race and gender is insane. Hell at the very least shut the freak up and keep it to yourself, so the whole world doesn't know this person only got the job because of their race and gender.

I acknowledge all the bad and terrible things in the world, I'm not pretending they don't exist. I'm just not convinced this is the solution
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 02:01:27 PM
He's going to nominate a milquetoast liberal judge and Republicans will act as if she's Assata Shakur.

I prefer french toast.

And I somehow doubt that's the path he goes. I think Biden realizes how deeply unpopular he is with his base. And what's going to happen in the midterms. So he's going to pick someone whose popular with his bass
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 26, 2022, 02:09:23 PM
For the sake of argument let's say you are 100% correct that they're structurally disadvantaged.

Is the solution to pick someone who isn't the most qualified for the job based on their race and gender?

I know people use this bullshit argument that there's numerous people that are just as qualified so use other criteria. Well look at sports, every QB is in the top 99.999 percentile of talented QB's in the world. Yet the difference between a top QB and a bottom tier QB is light years apart.

You're a Democrat president, pick a liberal justice. That's perfectly appropriate. But to make the single most important criteria for your nominee be race and gender is insane. Hell at the very least shut the freak up and keep it to yourself, so the whole world doesn't know this person only got the job because of their race and gender.

I acknowledge all the bad and terrible things in the world, I'm not pretending they don't exist. I'm just not convinced this is the solution

Well, that's because you haven't thought about it.

You're a medical man, with presumably a better understanding of the human body and physiology than the average joe. Are you better or worse equipped to help a patient suffering with menstrual issues than a woman with the same training and experience as you, or are you both equally well equipped?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 26, 2022, 02:14:28 PM


I prefer french toast.

And I somehow doubt that's the path he goes. I think Biden realizes how deeply unpopular he is with his base. And what's going to happen in the midterms. So he's going to pick someone whose popular with his bass

Honestly I'm going to skip the debate, assert that I'm correct, and wait for reality to prove it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 02:18:54 PM
Well, that's because you haven't thought about it.

You're a medical man, with presumably a better understanding of the human body and physiology than the average joe. Are you better or worse equipped to help a patient suffering with menstrual issues than a woman with the same training and experience as you, or are you both equally well equipped?

Does everyone have the same experience, training, demeanor, intellect etc etc?

If i was the best and brightest in the field of gyn and female issues, and someone else was just mediocre but had a vagina. Does that make them the best person for the job? At the top of a field small distances apart can be freaking huge, again look at every single sport out there.

Hell look at the two most successful coaches in the NFL. The one was a freaking lacrosse player, and the other ones a 300 pound dude who loves cheeseburgers.

Hell I'm not even saying he shouldn't try to diversify the court. But to literally say it's going to be a black woman is pure pandering and affirmative action. What about a white woman? A black man? An Indian? Hispanic? The ridiculousness of it is just indefensible
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 26, 2022, 02:22:21 PM
Does everyone have the same experience, training, demeanor, intellect etc etc?

If i was the best and brightest in the field of gyn and female issues, and someone else was just mediocre but had a vagina. Does that make them the best person for the job? At the top of a field small distances apart can be freaking huge, again look at every single sport out there.

Hell look at the two most successful coaches in the NFL. The one was a freaking lacrosse player, and the other ones a 300 pound dude who loves cheeseburgers.

Hell I'm not even saying he shouldn't try to diversify the court. But to literally say it's going to be a black woman is pure pandering and affirmative action. What about a white woman? A black man? An Indian? Hispanic? The ridiculousness of it is just indefensible

Right now the only person asserting that someone who is less qualified is going to be selected based upon their gender and skin colour is you.

It seems inarguable that a body such as the Supreme Court will be best served by its makeup reflecting the populace which it serves, so if there's a black woman who is qualified to sit on it then it would seem reasonable that they would be considered as a priority.

I think the "best qualified person regardless of anything else" principle was put to bed with the last two appointments, if indeed it ever truly existed regardless of which side of the House was picking.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 26, 2022, 02:27:33 PM
For the sake of argument let's say you are 100% correct that they're structurally disadvantaged.

Is the solution to pick someone who isn't the most qualified for the job based on their race and gender?

I know people use this bullshit argument that there's numerous people that are just as qualified so use other criteria. Well look at sports, every QB is in the top 99.999 percentile of talented QB's in the world. Yet the difference between a top QB and a bottom tier QB is light years apart.

You're a Democrat president, pick a liberal justice. That's perfectly appropriate. But to make the single most important criteria for your nominee be race and gender is insane. Hell at the very least shut the freak up and keep it to yourself, so the whole world doesn't know this person only got the job because of their race and gender.

I acknowledge all the bad and terrible things in the world, I'm not pretending they don't exist. I'm just not convinced this is the solution

If you consider black women being structurally disadvantaged a problem, what is a better way to address it than making a point to give the best of the best of them opportunities to represent themselves at the highest levels after ensuring that they go through a similar career progression as other previous justices?

If you don't consider black women being structurally disadvantaged a problem, do you consider it an inherent contradiction that in a nation built around the premise that all men are created equal, and a judicial system built around the premise that we ought to be judged by a jury of our peers, that out of 115 justices in the history of the supreme court, there have been a total of three non-white justices and five female justices? And that has no impact on the quality of the Supreme Court to accurately apply jurisprudential philosophies that reflects the reality of the population at large?

Also, do you consider it problematic that Reagan promised to place a woman on the court during his presidential campaign of 1980?

He's going to nominate a milquetoast liberal judge and Republicans will act as if she's Assata Shakur.

This is also true.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 02:38:28 PM
Right now the only person asserting that someone who is less qualified is going to be selected based upon their gender and skin colour is you.

It seems inarguable that a body such as the Supreme Court will be best served by its makeup reflecting the populace which it serves, so if there's a black woman who is qualified to sit on it then it would seem reasonable that they would be considered as a priority.

I think the "best qualified person regardless of anything else" principle was put to bed with the last two appointments, if indeed it ever truly existed regardless of which side of the House was picking.

Using Trump as a reason for doing something isn't the best idea. The guy is widely considered moron by people on both sides of the aisle. His one nominee was essentially guilty of being a rapist because of some delusional hippie and that was enough for everyone.

And I'm not the one suggesting that, Biden openly stated the next nominee would be a black woman. Therefore he decided that skin color and gender was the most important factors to consider over everything else.

And again there's how many hundred million Americans? Last time I checked there's more white women then anything, why not put a white woman on Supreme Court? There's more Hispanic women than black women, why not nominate a Hispanic woman?

And of course I agree that the most qualified person doesn't rise to the top of government, that's why we ended up with freaking Biden and Trump. But presumably Trump nominated someone that at least he believed was the most qualified person for the job.

I guess I just hate and bitch about everything the government does. I'm jaded, I own it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 26, 2022, 02:41:02 PM
If you were actually jaded you'd understand that every Supreme Court pick of your lifetime was not necessarily the "most qualified", just politically expedient enough to get appointed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 26, 2022, 02:41:46 PM
Last time I checked there's more white women then anything, why not put a white woman on Supreme Court?

Because they already have representation on the Supreme Court?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 26, 2022, 02:45:32 PM
Clearly we need a gay Asian non-binary on the Supreme Court.  Justice They Chang.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 02:51:59 PM
If you were actually jaded you'd understand that every Supreme Court pick of your lifetime was not necessarily the "most qualified", just politically expedient enough to get appointed.

I think John Roberts was a "most qualified" pick, but I don't think we've seen any of that since then.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 02:53:56 PM
Because they already have representation on the Supreme Court?

There's an African American and multiple women. There's no Hispanics though. Sounds like they're the people who don't have representation

I think this whole conversation were having about selective racial representation quotas is crazy. These Cunts should be about the freaking law, not representing the freaking characters from the YMCA song
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 26, 2022, 02:57:26 PM
There's an African American and multiple women. There's no Hispanics though. Sounds like they're the people who don't have representation

I think this whole conversation were having about selective racial representation quotas is crazy. These Cunts should be about the freaking law, not representing the freaking characters from the YMCA song

So is your complaint the threat of some kind of affirmative action, or the threat of the wrong kind of affirmative action?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 26, 2022, 02:58:49 PM


There's an African American and multiple women. There's no Hispanics though. Sounds like they're the people who don't have representation

Is it even possible for you to take more Ls in this conversation?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 26, 2022, 03:11:29 PM
It's absolutely absurd, anti-American, etc to limit yourself towards selecting a group of candidates based on race or gender.

Looking forward to the media trying to present absolute judicial radicals as moderates like they did Garland.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 03:19:09 PM
So is your complaint the threat of some kind of affirmative action, or the threat of the wrong kind of affirmative action?

I simply think it's ridiculous to simply state I'm only interested in someone of xyz race and gender, period.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 03:21:31 PM

Is it even possible for you to take more Ls in this conversation?

Sotoymer looks like a damn white lady!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 26, 2022, 03:23:27 PM
How Republicans Can Block Stephen Breyer’s Replacement

https://time.com/6142711/joe-biden-supreme-court-nominee-mitch-mcconnell-stephen-breyer/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 03:51:10 PM
How Republicans Can Block Stephen Breyer’s Replacement

https://time.com/6142711/joe-biden-supreme-court-nominee-mitch-mcconnell-stephen-breyer/


Also there's a question whether they'll continue to fight along themselves
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 26, 2022, 05:13:39 PM


It's absolutely absurd, anti-American, etc to limit yourself towards selecting a group of candidates based on race or gender.

Unlike limiting yourself towards selecting a pre-approved judge from The Heritage Foundation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 26, 2022, 07:14:56 PM
How Republicans Can Block Stephen Breyer’s Replacement
https://time.com/6142711/joe-biden-supreme-court-nominee-mitch-mcconnell-stephen-breyer/
Biden's appointee's gonna be a done deal.  If the GOP had any brains *if* they'd not turn this into a cause célčbre.

moving to the deep end of the pool...vvv...


Quote from: Johnny English
Well, that because you haven't thought about it.
  water's chilly...



Quote from: Johnny English
I have no doubt that the Republicans will find ways to delay and obfuscate until such time as they have the ability to put David Duke on the court.
Quote from: Badger
He's going to nominate a milquetoast liberal judge and Republicans will act like she's Assata Shakur.
Quote from: dcm1602
Sotoymer (sic) looks like a damn white lady!
David Duke?  Derriereata Shakur? (word filter must be fucked)  Sotoymer looks 'damn white'?
Lot's of heavy-handed L's to go around here what with the OTT hyperbole. 




Quote from: dcm1602
Is he (President Obama) identifying as a women these days?
Actually woman but that aside, my man OB'd lock up your J,  ofay 

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/70/Barack_Obama_and_Reggie_Love_playing_basketball_2.jpg/320px-Barack_Obama_and_Reggie_Love_playing_basketball_2.jpg)
 
OB --> SCOTUS?  y not?

.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 07:43:38 PM
Maybe women is her preferred noun
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 26, 2022, 10:04:25 PM
If you were actually jaded you'd understand that every Supreme Court pick of your lifetime was not necessarily the "most qualified", just politically expedient enough to get appointed.

Politically expedient enough to get appointed, combined with young enough to preserve a potentially 3+ decade long seat.

Speaking of which, it seems like Ketanji Brown Jackson is the popular name circulating but Leondra Kruger from the California Supreme Court seems like a Biden pick to me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 11:11:49 PM
Politically expedient enough to get appointed, combined with young enough to preserve a potentially 3+ decade long seat.

Speaking of which, it seems like Ketanji Brown Jackson is the popular name circulating but Leondra Kruger from the California Supreme Court seems like a Biden pick to me.

She's related to former speaker of the house Paul Ryan 🤔 (obviously not by blood) (the first Lady)

I do wonder how many red flags it'll set off with the left that she's married to a white dude, and is related to a former Republican speaker of the house

I imagine, but don't know. That this also could result in her getting any support from the right, which could be needed with this whole 5050 split thing
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 26, 2022, 11:42:17 PM
She's related to former speaker of the house Paul Ryan 🤔 (obviously not by blood) (the first Lady)

I do wonder how many red flags it'll set off with the left that she's married to a white dude, and is related to a former Republican speaker of the house

I imagine, but don't know. That this also could result in her getting any support from the right, which could be needed with this whole 5050 split thing

You think "the right" will support someone on the basis of being "married to a white dude" and being related to Paul Ryan?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 26, 2022, 11:48:38 PM
You think "the right" will support someone on the basis of being "married to a white dude" and being related to Paul Ryan?

Paul Ryan spoke on her behalf when she ran for circuit Court of whatever the freak.

So do I think if he did so again, could it get her a single vote two or three? I'd imagine so

Her husband  is irrelevant

I don't think "the right" will support her, but she only needs a handful
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on January 27, 2022, 12:38:16 AM
Paul Ryan spoke on her behalf when she ran for circuit Court of whatever the freak.

So do I think if he did so again, could it get her a single vote two or three? I'd imagine so

Her husband  is irrelevant

I don't think "the right" will support her, but she only needs a handful

I think Murkowski and Collins vote for any realistic SC nominee. I think Manchin does too, for that matter. I'm completely out of my depth predicting what Sinema will ever do. No other Dem will realistically vote against a Biden nominee. I don't think being Paul Ryan's n-law will really play into it one way or another, except as vague reassurance that she's part of the in-crowd in terms of national politics.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 27, 2022, 06:02:40 AM


I do wonder how many red flags it'll set off with the left that she's married to a white dude, and is related to a former Republican speaker of the house

Why are you like this
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 27, 2022, 08:06:19 AM
Welp.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/witness-can-confirm-matt-gaetz-was-told-he-had-sex-with-a-minor?ref=home (https://www.thedailybeast.com/witness-can-confirm-matt-gaetz-was-told-he-had-sex-with-a-minor?ref=home)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 27, 2022, 08:16:20 AM
If you consider black women being structurally disadvantaged a problem, what is a better way to address it than making a point to give the best of the best of them opportunities to represent themselves at the highest levels after ensuring that they go through a similar career progression as other previous justices?

If you don't consider black women being structurally disadvantaged a problem, do you consider it an inherent contradiction that in a nation built around the premise that all men are created equal, and a judicial system built around the premise that we ought to be judged by a jury of our peers, that out of 115 justices in the history of the supreme court, there have been a total of three non-white justices and five female justices? And that has no impact on the quality of the Supreme Court to accurately apply jurisprudential philosophies that reflects the reality of the population at large?

Also, do you consider it problematic that Reagan promised to place a woman on the court during his presidential campaign of 1980?

This is also true.

Keep this going, dcm is close to the record
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 27, 2022, 11:11:46 AM
How Republicans Can Block Stephen Breyer’s Replacement

https://time.com/6142711/joe-biden-supreme-court-nominee-mitch-mcconnell-stephen-breyer/


They updated this article to state they were wrong.

Quote
Editor’s Note: The original version of this story incorrectly stated that Republicans could use Senate rules to block a Biden Supreme Court nomination. It was based on the author’s incorrect analysis of a May 13, 2021, Congressional Research Service report. The Senate will require a majority of votes to approve Justice Stephen Breyer’s replacement, not 60 votes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 27, 2022, 11:13:41 AM
They updated this article to state they were wrong.


Liberals are just making up the rules as they go to get what they want! COMMUNISM!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 27, 2022, 09:42:26 PM
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1486018301763497987?s=21

16 year old me was so woke
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 28, 2022, 12:03:22 PM
re: Infrastructure Bill and the Pittsburgh bridge that collapsed this morning

Tweet of a service request for that very bridge from 4 years ago. Thread is pretty hilarious.

https://twitter.com/gpk320/status/1078885655634157569 (https://twitter.com/gpk320/status/1078885655634157569)

TLDR:

Pittsburgh Guy: Hey, there is a rusted out support x beam on the bridge

Pittsburgh: K *removes rusted support beam*

Bridge: *worked out naturally from there*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 31, 2022, 12:03:49 PM
Imagine believing this

https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1488149646602129409?t=DHYSz8sA2yGXa63RPpq4sQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 31, 2022, 12:10:00 PM
Imagine believing this

https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1488149646602129409?t=DHYSz8sA2yGXa63RPpq4sQ&s=19
Imagine motorboating her fat funbags
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 31, 2022, 04:00:25 PM
Imagine believing this

https://twitter.com/SpeakerPelosi/status/1488149646602129409?t=DHYSz8sA2yGXa63RPpq4sQ&s=19
https://twitter.com/unusual_whales/status/1480656947577860096?cxt=HHwWgMC9qcTprIwpAAAA


Imagine motorboating her fat funbags
Where mazophillia meets callimastia  : )
 
(https://media.giphy.com/media/XEmDmFAaOOKeQH6Dks/giphy.gif)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 31, 2022, 04:03:51 PM
Outstanding work.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/31/politics/fact-check-thomas-massie-voltaire-neo-nazi-criticize/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 31, 2022, 04:11:05 PM
Outstanding work.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/31/politics/fact-check-thomas-massie-voltaire-neo-nazi-criticize/index.html

Good to see this scumbag propagandist twink still has a job post-Trump.

Amazing how he's pivoted from fact checking the Presidents every word to harping on irrelevant republican reps.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 31, 2022, 05:45:16 PM
https://twitter.com/unusual_whales/status/1480656947577860096?cxt=HHwWgMC9qcTprIwpAAAA

Where mazophillia meets callimastia  : )
 
(https://media.giphy.com/media/XEmDmFAaOOKeQH6Dks/giphy.gif)



There's way too much reading to go through all of this

But to me the biggest red flag is the 140 million in options.

When politicians start throwing around hundreds of millions in options you have to think some real fishy shits going on
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 01, 2022, 04:07:15 PM
Outstanding work.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/01/31/politics/fact-check-thomas-massie-voltaire-neo-nazi-criticize/index.html
By 'outstanding work' I assume that was in reference to the post above yours and not that CNN dork.


There's way too much reading to go through all of this.

But to me the biggest red flag is the 140 million in options.

When politicians start throwing around hundreds of millions in options you have to think some real fishy shits going on
Way too much reading?  A tweeted graph you could read inside of 10 seconds, a facetiously grandiloquent phrase accompanying a bobbing motorboat with funbags?...where's the "TL;DR" here?   
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 01, 2022, 04:14:24 PM
By 'outstanding work' I assume that was in reference to the post above yours and not that CNN dork.

No, it was in reference to the politician who got confused between Voltaire and the Nazi pederast. Maybe if they had better books in the school libraries that wouldn't be such an easy mistake to make.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 01, 2022, 05:28:12 PM
By 'outstanding work' I assume that was in reference to the post above yours and not that CNN dork.

Way too much reading?  A tweeted graph you could read inside of 10 seconds, a facetiously grandiloquent phrase accompanying a bobbing motorboat with funbags?...where's the "TL;DR" here?   

The graph was a tweet about an article, which had numerous subarticles written up and linked in it delving into the numerous types of of investments involved and actions taken.

I don't imagine any amount of reading will change my mind on how scummy and corrupt the politicians involved are
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 01, 2022, 08:55:27 PM
The graph was a tweet about an article, which had numerous subarticles written up and linked in it delving into the numerous types of of investments involved and actions taken.

I don't imagine any amount of reading will change my mind on how scummy and corrupt the politicians involved are
No argument.  Pols lining their pockets has been around almost as long as the 'oldest profession' itself. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 03, 2022, 06:47:46 AM
Money well spent

https://twitter.com/kirk_bado/status/1422236489073713157?t=FB_JtEDB8Z8Kx-jjfHe91g&s=19

https://twitter.com/RepShontelBrown/status/1488889877848539140?t=HsvHCzHF37pfEfh22XNZAA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 04, 2022, 02:28:30 PM
LOL

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/04/us/politics/republicans-jan-6-cheney-censure.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 04, 2022, 02:39:25 PM
LOL

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/02/04/us/politics/republicans-jan-6-cheney-censure.html

Figures.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 04, 2022, 03:12:03 PM
I'm sure they are devastated.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 07, 2022, 10:28:26 AM
Heismanberg, sort your people out.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/2/2/2078229/-Chip-Roy-demands-we-deport-the-Canadian-leader-who-is-in-Canada-based-on-a-conspiracy-post
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 07, 2022, 10:55:32 AM
Heismanberg, sort your people out.

https://www.dailykos.com/stories/2022/2/2/2078229/-Chip-Roy-demands-we-deport-the-Canadian-leader-who-is-in-Canada-based-on-a-conspiracy-post
You too.

CNN: Crippling protests in Canada over Covid-19 rules enter second week as reported hate-related cases probed.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/07/americas/canada-trucker-protests-covid-weekend-arrests-monday/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 07, 2022, 11:10:19 AM
You too.

CNN: Crippling protests in Canada over Covid-19 rules enter second week as reported hate-related cases probed.
https://www.cnn.com/2022/02/07/americas/canada-trucker-protests-covid-weekend-arrests-monday/index.html

we're gonna kill them all with kindness and compassion.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 07, 2022, 11:13:21 AM
we're gonna kill them all with kindness and compassion.
"If you don't stop this madness, we will no longer bring you welcome muffins and offer to help you with your yardwork on the weekends."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 09, 2022, 12:31:17 PM
https://twitter.com/mepfuller/status/1491469224014929930?s=21
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 09, 2022, 01:15:53 PM
I don't understand how this conversation wasn't "hey guys, we just realised that elected representatives who make laws and are privy to all sorts of classified information that the public and often the markets don't have are actually allowed to trade on the stock market, should we do something about that?"

"freak yes of course we should, how did the founding fathers miss that?"

And thus the legislation was passed by lunchtime and they carried on with all sorts of other far more complex and nuanced things.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 09, 2022, 01:35:08 PM
This is well done.

https://youtu.be/X6iSRU9486I
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 09, 2022, 01:48:13 PM
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1491497039544340482?t=3P1CePdlDdGoDUbbhnHGSg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 09, 2022, 02:30:40 PM
I think a reasonable compromise would be to have some kind of generic index/target date funds for elected officials where they have to lock in their distribution allocations the previous year, sort of like how 401k contributions work for normal humans.

Plus it's not like outlawing their stock trading is going to cut into their bribe profits and kick backs or anything
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 09, 2022, 02:38:38 PM
I think a reasonable compromise would be to have some kind of generic index/target date funds for elected officials where they have to lock in their distribution allocations the previous year, sort of like how 401k contributions work for normal humans.

Plus it's not like outlawing their stock trading is going to cut into their bribe profits and kick backs or anything

Blind trusts would be good too unless they aren't really blind.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 09, 2022, 03:02:35 PM
https://twitter.com/sahilkapur/status/1491497039544340482?t=3P1CePdlDdGoDUbbhnHGSg&s=19

He almost got it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 09, 2022, 04:36:30 PM
https://www.nbcnews.com/nbc-out/out-politics-and-policy/florida-gov-ron-desantis-signals-support-dont-say-gay-bill-rcna15326

Quote
Jennifer Solomon, a South Florida resident who has LGBTQ children, reiterated the White House's sentiment.

“Parental rights? Whose parental rights? Only parental rights if you’re raising a child according to DeSantis?" she said. "DeSantis tries to paint this picture that every family is this 1950s mom and dad with two kids and a cat and dog. That is not what Florida looks like; that is not what the country looks like.”

Solomon said her 11-year-old son, Cooper, who identifies as male and has "never wanted to be a girl," however prefers to wear his school's girls uniform and enjoys dressing up like a fairytale princess for fun.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 09, 2022, 11:38:42 PM
https://www.dhs.gov/news/2022/02/07/dhs-issues-national-terrorism-advisory-system-ntas-bulletin
Quote
While the conditions underlying the heightened threat landscape have not significantly changed over the last year, the convergence of the following factors has increased the volatility, unpredictability, and complexity of the threat environment: (1) the proliferation of false or misleading narratives, which sow discord or undermine public trust in U.S. government institutions;
  hmmm....


“Did you really think we want those laws observed?" said Dr. Ferris. "We want them to be broken. You'd better get it straight that it's not a bunch of boy scouts you're up against... We're after power and we mean it... There's no way to rule innocent men. The only power any government has is the power to crack down on criminals. Well, when there aren't enough criminals one makes them. One declares so many things to be a crime that it becomes impossible for men to live without breaking laws. Who wants a nation of law-abiding citizens? What's there in that for anyone? But just pass the kind of laws that can neither be observed nor enforced or objectively interpreted – and you create a nation of law-breakers – and then you cash in on guilt. Now that's the system, Mr. Reardon, that's the game, and once you understand it, you'll be much easier to deal with.” - from Atlas Shrugged
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 14, 2022, 05:00:17 PM
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60378479
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 14, 2022, 05:02:46 PM
I don't understand this.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60380318

If they've failed to provide sufficient evidence for the case to be upheld, how can there be any value to a jury considering a verdict?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 14, 2022, 07:56:02 PM
I don't understand this.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60380318

If they've failed to provide sufficient evidence for the case to be upheld, how can there be any value to a jury considering a verdict?
"Rakoff said that he would not file his ruling until after the jury reaches its verdict. He said that given the likelihood of an appeal, those judges will “greatly benefit” from knowing how the jury decided."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 14, 2022, 11:07:17 PM
I don't understand this.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60380318

If they've failed to provide sufficient evidence for the case to be upheld, how can there be any value to a jury considering a verdict?

Former NY Ranger Ron Duguay married supermodels Kim Alexis & Carol Alt and is now banging Sarah Palin?  I don't understand this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 15, 2022, 06:48:27 AM
Former NY Ranger Ron Duguay married supermodels Kim Alexis & Carol Alt and is now banging Sarah Palin?  I don't understand this.
Maybe Duguay thought he was getting the Lisa Ann version
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 15, 2022, 10:34:24 AM
Virginia legislature accidentally helped workers, now trying to backpedal

https://twitter.com/MichaelLeePope/status/1493322501082202112?t=Zl0p00ScS9CBUFSb5mvJpA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 15, 2022, 10:56:39 AM
Virginia legislature accidentally helped workers, now trying to backpedal

https://twitter.com/MichaelLeePope/status/1493322501082202112?t=Zl0p00ScS9CBUFSb5mvJpA&s=19

Surely "I didn't understand what I was voting for" is a clear admission that he is failing to fulfil the basic requirements of his job, and should be immediately removed from it?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 15, 2022, 11:41:35 AM
Surely "I didn't understand what I was voting for" is a clear admission that he is failing to fulfil the basic requirements of his job, and should be immediately removed from it?

Naa, you can go full retard and just hang around as long as you have no shame.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 15, 2022, 05:16:51 PM
Virginia legislature accidentally helped workers, now trying to backpedal

https://twitter.com/MichaelLeePope/status/1493322501082202112?t=Zl0p00ScS9CBUFSb5mvJpA&s=19

I feel like this article leaves out all the important details so that no reader can form an educated opinion on the topic
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 18, 2022, 08:29:45 AM
Another continuing resolution passed, through March 11, to avoid gov't shutdown.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 18, 2022, 09:34:42 AM
Another continuing resolution passed, through March 11, to avoid gov't shutdown.
Stop2End
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 18, 2022, 10:33:54 AM
Stop2End
We offered you (1) of our "I Love Trump" Shirts with no response? Has President Trump LOST your support? CORRECT THE RECORD: bit.ly/3LE1pIu

Stop2End
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 20, 2022, 01:22:56 AM
https://forward.com/fast-forward/482693/after-a-jewish-lawmaker-gave-an-impassioned-speech-wyoming-s-conservative/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 22, 2022, 03:50:41 PM
Locking down the winemom demographic

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1496229992191119364?t=iEaxQy2WxUDWuUMXB5PvEw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on February 22, 2022, 03:57:55 PM
Locking down the winemom demographic

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1496229992191119364?t=iEaxQy2WxUDWuUMXB5PvEw&s=19

Would bang
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 22, 2022, 04:20:23 PM
Abby dirt Road probably   (face kinda hurting)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 22, 2022, 06:00:39 PM
Locking down the winemom demographic

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1496229992191119364?t=iEaxQy2WxUDWuUMXB5PvEw&s=19

No word in that headline led me to guess the next word in that headline.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 23, 2022, 09:44:04 AM
I'd love to see how well something like this would go over in the USA

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/23/uk-could-ban-students-who-fail-math-and-english-from-college-loans.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 23, 2022, 10:14:30 AM
https://forward.com/fast-forward/482693/after-a-jewish-lawmaker-gave-an-impassioned-speech-wyoming-s-conservative/

Republicans vote against an overly broad bill as "forward" gives an absurd definition of what crt is and what the critiques are.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 23, 2022, 03:14:54 PM


Republicans give an absurd definition of what crt is and what the critiques are.

Fixed
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 24, 2022, 10:44:36 AM
I'd love to see how well something like this would go over in the USA

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/23/uk-could-ban-students-who-fail-math-and-english-from-college-loans.html

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/02/24/uk-college-students-could-be-repaying-loans-into-their-60s.html

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 24, 2022, 12:54:20 PM
Kyle Rittenhouse is suing LeBron James for defamation
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 25, 2022, 09:43:15 AM
SCOTUS nominee, solid background & credentials; confirm & get back to work 'gov'

 https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/02/25/us/supreme-court-nominee-biden
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 25, 2022, 10:36:21 AM
SCOTUS nominee, solid background & credentials; confirm & get back to work 'gov'

 https://www.nytimes.com/live/2022/02/25/us/supreme-court-nominee-biden
I think she's not terrible, which means a Republican senator will probably accuse her of wanting to kill cops or something.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 25, 2022, 10:55:08 AM
I think she's not terrible, which means a Republican senator will probably accuse her of wanting to kill cops or something.


Would still be an upgrade over conjuring up a freaking rape charge and slandering a man on the basis of said bogus charge and his reaction in defending himself.

There's not a lot the rank and file of the GOP could to do this candidate that would be worse than how Kavanaugh was treated. Even ACB got excrement from resident genius Ibram Rodgers for having the caucasity to adopt black kids!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 25, 2022, 12:03:28 PM
I think she's not terrible, which means a Republican senator will probably accuse her of wanting to kill cops or something.

This is going to suck but Republican Senate Leader at the time (Paul Ryan) heartily went to bat for her during her D.C. District Court nomination.  What's worse, the two are "family" by way of marriage (must be that party of abe lincoln thing):

“Our politics may differ, but my praise for Ketanji’s intellect, for her character, for her integrity is unequivocal,” Ryan said at her December 2012 nomination hearing. “She’s an amazing person, and I favorably recommend her consideration.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 26, 2022, 11:02:39 PM
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

https://twitter.com/cmclymer/status/1497625292814360578?s=20&t=aR2A6gIxXsj0Q2ktPko2yg (https://twitter.com/cmclymer/status/1497625292814360578?s=20&t=aR2A6gIxXsj0Q2ktPko2yg)

-Didn't do any research on the group to whom she'd be speaking
-Heard this in the introduction, "Now they're going on about Russia and Vladimir Putin is Hitler they say that's not a good thing." and still went out there
-Heard chants of "Putin! Putin! Putin! Putin!" and still went out there

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 27, 2022, 02:18:53 AM
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA

https://twitter.com/cmclymer/status/1497625292814360578?s=20&t=aR2A6gIxXsj0Q2ktPko2yg (https://twitter.com/cmclymer/status/1497625292814360578?s=20&t=aR2A6gIxXsj0Q2ktPko2yg)

-Didn't do any research on the group to whom she'd be speaking
-Heard this in the introduction, "Now they're going on about Russia and Vladimir Putin is Hitler they say that's not a good thing." and still went out there
-Heard chants of "Putin! Putin! Putin! Putin!" and still went out there
In her defense, she's not bright.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 01, 2022, 06:59:11 AM
Today is primary day in Texas.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 01, 2022, 11:05:23 AM
Senate GOP blocked The Women's Health Protection Act with the help of Manchin.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 01, 2022, 11:16:32 AM
Senate GOP blocked The Women's Health Protection Act with the help of Manchin.

Did he ever comment on why he did?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 01, 2022, 11:27:57 AM
Roe v Wade has 72% support nationally and there's not a single state where banning abortion has majority support. And yet this fails 48 to 46 in the Senate. loldemocracy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 01, 2022, 11:50:52 AM
Did he ever comment on why he did?

My guess would be the bill is incredibly overly broad in terms of allowing abortion.

I'm pro-choice but the "abortion on demand and without apology crowd" needs to get a freaking grip as that's totally outside the trimester framework of Roe.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 01, 2022, 12:01:16 PM


My guess would be the bill is incredibly overly broad in terms of allowing abortion.

I'm pro-choice but the "abortion on demand and without apology crowd" needs to get a freaking grip as that's totally outside the trimester framework of Roe.

The bill could not go 1 inch further than Roe and it would still die in the current Senate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 01, 2022, 12:57:27 PM

The bill could not go 1 inch further than Roe and it would still die in the current Senate.
  ^^  I see what you did there - nice lol  :-)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f7/Salmon_caviar_on_a_spoon.jpg/320px-Salmon_caviar_on_a_spoon.jpg) V. (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2e/Dwyane_Wade-Toni_Kukoc_in_a_2005_game.jpg/235px-Dwyane_Wade-Toni_Kukoc_in_a_2005_game.jpg)

I'll let myself out

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 01, 2022, 06:03:37 PM

The bill could not go 1 inch further than Roe and it would still die in the current Senate.

The legislation literally codified legal abortions up until the due date.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 02, 2022, 06:14:10 AM
The legislation literally codified legal abortions up until the due date.
I'm saying even if it didn't go any further than RvW it still wouldn't have passed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 02, 2022, 03:13:59 PM
This guy

https://twitter.com/EvanDonovan/status/1499086276519239680?t=tIL2nnuJaZOF2uME8IJ_lQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 02, 2022, 03:26:57 PM
This guy

https://twitter.com/EvanDonovan/status/1499086276519239680?t=tIL2nnuJaZOF2uME8IJ_lQ&s=19

...listen to the peevish, disapproving sigh.....what a jawboning cvnt.


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 02, 2022, 03:58:05 PM
He should respect people's personal choices.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 02, 2022, 04:05:34 PM
He should respect people's personal choices.

Does this go both ways?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 02, 2022, 04:10:52 PM
Does this go both ways?

Yes of course it does, right up until it runs up against one person's personal choices impacting someone else's health. C'mon dcm, you know this already.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 02, 2022, 04:21:38 PM
I care less about what he said than why he had to be an poopchute about it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 02, 2022, 04:21:45 PM
Does this go both ways?

I take it you weren't a good outfielder.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 02, 2022, 04:22:12 PM
I go both ways?

Hey, we're not judging.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 02, 2022, 04:48:24 PM
Yes of course it does, right up until it runs up against one person's personal choices impacting someone else's health. C'mon dcm, you know this already.

I'm vehemently anti anti-vaxxer, but the mask thing is overblown at this point. I work in ICUs, and most freaking health care workers don't even give a excrement about wearing masks and wearing them properly anymore.

If someone isn't vaccinated and boosted, and taking all their appropriate precautions at this point that's on freaking them. If you have cancer or aids or anything else making you vulnerable you should be wearing an n95 at this point and avoiding people who don't wear masks.

I'm cool with mandating masks for mass gatherings/events out of extreme precautions (ie sports concerts) but freak off with the rest of the world already. This shits endemic or close to it, let people live like people again.

Irresponsible behavior always has and always will have a profound impact on others. Maybe it's not always as direct or widespread as with covid, but it always exist.

Regardless at this point the only, only freaking purpose mask serve is as a tool to flatten the curve. And recently hosptials have started to improve drastically.

In my opinion, rather than encouraging people to be burnt out and either ignore or bend the rules (ie not wearing masks and not wearing them properly) I'd rather see the CDC lift the masks mandate and bring it back when it's when needed and will do the most good (ie when a new variant dominates the world and things become overbearing again)

I think every reasonable person could agree that people not being vaccinated is the biggest problem. So if saying hey if yorie fully vaccinated and boosted you don't need to wear a mask anymore incentives people to go get vaccinated, then that will do more good than the masks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 02, 2022, 04:49:06 PM
Hey, we're not judging.

Why else do you think I followed Heis here
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 02, 2022, 04:52:25 PM
I'm vehemently anti anti-vaxxer, but the mask thing is overblown at this point. I work in ICUs, and most freaking health care workers don't even give a excrement about wearing masks and wearing them properly anymore.

If someone isn't vaccinated and boosted, and taking all their appropriate precautions at this point that's on freaking them. If you have cancer or aids or anything else making you vulnerable you should be wearing an n95 at this point and avoiding people who don't wear masks.

I'm cool with mandating masks for mass gatherings/events out of extreme precautions (ie sports concerts) but freak off with the rest of the world already. This shits endemic or close to it, let people live like people again.

Irresponsible behavior always has and always will have a profound impact on others. Maybe it's not always as direct or widespread as with covid, but it always exist.

Regardless at this point the only, only freaking purpose mask serve is as a tool to flatten the curve. And recently hosptials have started to improve drastically.

In my opinion, rather than encouraging people to be burnt out and either ignore or bend the rules (ie not wearing masks and not wearing them properly) I'd rather see the CDC lift the masks mandate and bring it back when it's when needed and will do the most good (ie when a new variant dominates the world and things become overbearing again)

I'm inclined to agree. We're probably dropping all mask mandates up here by the end of the month and I'm OK with that. But you were asking a question about rights and freedoms, not about whether mask mandates are still necessary.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on March 02, 2022, 06:07:27 PM
Today is primary day in Texas.
https://www.axios.com/local/dallas/2022/03/02/van-taylor-affair-with-isis-widow-runoff

And one day later, one of the lead candidates drops out for having an affair with an ISIS window.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 04, 2022, 12:56:37 PM
lol, Rick Scott

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1499811601335136266?t=XlQnu6Qu8HvJmV98xxAxjQ&s=19

One of the most stupid and harmful delusions in America's collective consciousness is that it's easy to collect welfare checks and that a significant number of "undeserving" people are doing it. If there ever was, there certainly isn't anymore after the Reagan through Clinton years.

in b4 "I saw a lady with an iPhone use food stamps"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 04, 2022, 01:41:48 PM
lol, Rick Scott

https://twitter.com/mattyglesias/status/1499811601335136266?t=XlQnu6Qu8HvJmV98xxAxjQ&s=19

One of the most stupid and harmful delusions in America's collective consciousness is that it's easy to collect welfare checks and that a significant number of "undeserving" people are doing it. If there ever was, there certainly isn't anymore after the Reagan through Clinton years.

in b4 "I saw a lady with an iPhone use food stamps"


I thought liberals were all about people paying their fair share?

Half of Americans don't pay any taxes

Stolen from CNBC

More than 100 million U.S. households, or 61% of all taxpayers, paid no federal income taxes last year, according to a new report.

The pandemic and federal stimulus led to a huge spike in the number of Americans who either owed no federal income tax or received tax credits from the government. According to the Urban-Brookings Tax Policy Center, 107 million households owed no income taxes in 2020, up from 76 million — or 44% of all taxpayers — in 2019.


"It's a really big number," said Howard Gleckman, senior fellow in the Tax Policy Center. "It's also really transitory."

Gleckman said the main reasons for the spike — high unemployment, large stimulus checks and generous tax credit programs — will largely expire after 2022, so the share of nontaxpayers will fall again starting next year.

The share of Americans who pay zero income taxes is expected to stay high, at around 57% this year, according to the Tax Policy Center. It's expected to fall back down to 42% in 2022 and remain at around 41% or 42% through 2025, "assuming the economy continues to rebound and several temporary tax benefits expire as scheduled," Gleckman said
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 04, 2022, 01:45:28 PM
FWIW I don't think making people on welfare accomplishes anything whatsoever. Outside of simply jerking off his constituents
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 04, 2022, 02:24:17 PM
FWIW I don't think making people on welfare accomplishes anything whatsoever. Outside of simply jerking off his constituents
Next time just say that first
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 04, 2022, 02:40:04 PM
Tax welfare recipients on their capital gains.  That'll show em.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 04, 2022, 04:21:09 PM
"Welfare?"   Hey slick Rick do you mean 'corporate welfare' where corporations get special handouts from the government resulting in we the unwashed masses having to pay more in taxes to make up for these hidden tax breaks, subsidies, and loopholes?....

dunno what this has to do with anything...
......just thought to was a cute sign....

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/ff/Welfare_Not_Warfare.jpg/252px-Welfare_Not_Warfare.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on March 04, 2022, 05:09:36 PM
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60621796 (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60621796)

Quote
Lindsey Graham said the only way Russia's invasion of Ukraine ends is "for somebody in Russia to take this guy out".

In a statement on Twitter, the outspoken Republican asks if the Russian president has a "Brutus" who can take out Mr Putin and end the war.

His comments have outraged the Russian ambassador to the US.

Mr Graham, who represents South Carolina, tweeted: "You would be doing your country - and the world - a great service.

"Is there a Brutus in Russia? Is there a more successful Colonel Stauffenberg in the Russian military?"

Ah do declare Mr. Graham, such talk is unbecoming of a Southern gentleman and you are giving me the vapors.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 04, 2022, 05:55:45 PM
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60621796 (https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-60621796)

Ah do declare Mr. Graham, such talk is unbecoming of a Southern gentleman and you are giving me the vapors.

Does the whole world not agree with him?

Minus China of course
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 04, 2022, 06:56:21 PM
Does the whole world not agree with him?

Minus China of course
They disagree with saying it publicly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 04, 2022, 07:12:43 PM
Well, Putin being deposed internally would be the best case scenario for getting rid of him. Another country assassinating him would run the risk of escalation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 04, 2022, 08:36:18 PM
Well, Putin being deposed internally would be the best case scenario for getting rid of him. Another country assassinating him would run the risk of escalation.
Eh just off him and blame it on some Russian dude.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 05, 2022, 05:51:50 AM
Eh just off him and blame it on some Russian dude.
The US couldn't kill Bin Laden without crashing a helicopter and a bystander unintentionally live tweeting the raid. Not sure we do stealth and subtlety anymore.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 05, 2022, 08:02:27 AM
The US couldn't kill Bin Laden without crashing a helicopter and a bystander unintentionally live tweeting the raid. Not sure we do stealth and subtlety anymore.


Maybe we try to mess it up on purpose, then we will freak up and do it right.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 09, 2022, 08:04:54 AM
excrement like this is completely un-American regardless of which political party it comes from.

Do not support even the concept being floated

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/03/09/gop-pushes-for-an-earthquake-in-american-electoral-power-00015402

I'm all for a red tide, but not crazies making their own rules. This is as bad as the left wanting to hijack the Supreme Court
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 09, 2022, 08:13:00 AM


I'm all for a red tide, but not crazies making their own rules.

These are mutually inclusive.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 09, 2022, 08:18:58 AM

These are mutually inclusive.

Must have forgotten about the democrats wanting to eliminate the filibuster and basically dismantle the Supreme Court because they are just as bad
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 09, 2022, 08:28:45 AM
Must have forgotten about the democrats wanting to eliminate the filibuster and basically dismantle the Supreme Court because they are just as bad
Correct, the Senate and SCOTUS are deeply undemocratic and broken.

However you can barely find a handful of democrats willing to do anything about SCOTUS.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on March 09, 2022, 08:42:05 AM
I'm all for a red tide, but not crazies making their own rules. This is as bad as the left wanting to hijack the Supreme Court

Democrats have won 7/8 of the last presidential elections by popular vote, and have nominated 3/9 current supreme court justices. But yes, you should be concerned about the left's hijacking of the court.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 09, 2022, 08:52:17 AM
Democrats have won 7/8 of the last presidential elections by popular vote, and have nominated 3/9 current supreme court justices. But yes, you should be concerned about the left's hijacking of the court.

The electoral college was made up like a bajillion years ago as was the setup for the Supreme Court.

You can argue the rules are stupid and want them changed, but this wasn't some modern scheme created the other day.

The filibuster, Supreme Court hijacking, and this new Republican nonsense are all people trying to steal power. Of course there's gerrymandering too which is an ageless tradition for both
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 09, 2022, 08:57:56 AM
The electoral college was made up like a bajillion years ago as was the setup for the Supreme Court.

You can argue the rules are stupid and want them changed, but this wasn't some modern scheme created the other day.

The filibuster, Supreme Court hijacking, and this new Republican nonsense are all people trying to steal power. Of course there's gerrymandering too which is an ageless tradition for both
The appointment process for SCOTUS as well as the 9-seat size of it are both traditional norms and not hardwired into the constitution. The appointment process was modified multiple times in the last 50 years.

We're not dealing with laws of nature here.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 09, 2022, 09:00:54 AM
The appointment process for SCOTUS as well as the 9-seat size of it are both traditional norms and not hardwired into the constitution. The appointment process was modified multiple times in the last 50 years.

We're not dealing with laws of nature here.

Sure they're based on tradition, but if Republicans came in and said oh we have powder let's add 10 more seats now to swing power in our favor. That's absolutely freaking hijacking it.

You want to change the Supreme Court fine, but a mad dash bumrush to grab power isn't the right way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on March 09, 2022, 09:07:41 AM
Sure they're based on tradition, but if Republicans came in and said oh we have powder let's add 10 more seats now to swing power in our favor. That's absolutely freaking hijacking it.

You want to change the Supreme Court fine, but a mad dash bumrush to grab power isn't the right way.

How would you feel about five justices appointed by each party, with a further five appointed by those ten? Total of 15 justices, equal partisan representation, with collaboration built into the process and five non-partisan appointees?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 09, 2022, 10:38:10 AM


Sure they're based on tradition, but if Republicans came in and said oh we have powder let's add 10 more seats now to swing power in our favor. That's absolutely freaking hijacking it.

And then Democrats do the same thing in response, further delegitimizing the institution of the Supreme Court? Oh noooooooooooo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 09, 2022, 10:43:02 AM
Democrats have won 7/8 of the last presidential elections by popular vote, and have nominated 3/9 current supreme court justices. But yes, you should be concerned about the left's hijacking of the court.

good thing we don't elect Presidents by popular vote.

SCOTUS is de-legitimized only towards partisan hacks who want hacktivist judges on the bench to totally excrement on the Constitution because if its a living document it can be interpreted however we want!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 09, 2022, 10:48:14 AM
Hacktivism: computer hacking (as by infiltration and disruption of a network or website) done to further the goals of political or social activism
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 09, 2022, 10:51:59 AM
Hacktivism: computer hacking (as by infiltration and disruption of a network or website) done to further the goals of political or social activism

Yes, because it doesn't also have an alternative meaning of hacks utilizing their position to engage in activism. See: Sotomayor, Sonia.

Or for that matter every freaking dumb journalist who's referring to the legislation down in Florida as the "don't say gay" bill. How dare we not discuss sexuality with kids in kindergarten?!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 09, 2022, 10:52:57 AM
Yes, because it doesn't also have an alternative meaning of hacks utilizing their position to engage in activism. See: Sotomayor, Sonia.

Or for that matter every freaking dumb journalist who's referring to the legislation down in Florida as the "don't say gay" bill. How dare we not discuss sexuality with kids in kindergarten?!

It does not.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 09, 2022, 12:07:28 PM
Looking the other way on Texas abortion bounty hunters, just as the constitution intended.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 09, 2022, 12:35:15 PM
https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/?gclid=CjwKCAiAvaGRBhBlEiwAiY-yMDoz0VrUJg1JgPq01wSvG2_PAn8Y9aRvyNgn_Mst2dS82SWw__0BSBoCIfEQAvD_BwE
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 09, 2022, 12:43:23 PM
https://www.theadvocates.org/quiz/?gclid=CjwKCAiAvaGRBhBlEiwAiY-yMDoz0VrUJg1JgPq01wSvG2_PAn8Y9aRvyNgn_Mst2dS82SWw__0BSBoCIfEQAvD_BwE

Uh..... Libertarian propaganda sites? Really?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 09, 2022, 12:56:05 PM
Uh..... Libertarian propaganda sites? Really?
Frankly I didn't even look/open it - it said 'quick' so I threw it out there.  You do seem chafed, however that wasn't my intent (seriously). 

Here's another one
https://www.isidewith.com/political-quiz


EDIT:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S5Sw2vsJkBc
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 09, 2022, 01:11:29 PM
Uh..... Libertarian propaganda sites? Really?

NVM, wrong link.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 10, 2022, 06:13:30 PM
Radical MB should get to decide what happens to people who write these bills

https://twitter.com/byKateSmith/status/1502015734871904264?t=NzUwJTw54Ktk99sBcYgy4w&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 10, 2022, 06:18:41 PM
Everyone with a uterus in MO should be filing a petition to challenge that^.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 10, 2022, 06:26:26 PM
Radical MB should get to decide what happens to people who write these bills

https://twitter.com/byKateSmith/status/1502015734871904264?t=NzUwJTw54Ktk99sBcYgy4w&s=19

I love that American right wingers love to bleat about the importance of the Constitution while also being huge supporters of legislation predicated on religious doctrine.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 10, 2022, 08:20:10 PM
The rights stance on abortion just freaking kills them.

They'd have so much more success and support if they tweaked their argument to be something akin to abortions are repulsive and immoral, therefore the government shouldn't subsidize them. (instead of their current insane view point of making them illegal and having these insane penalties). The libertarian wing of the right is losing to these Bible thumpers
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 10, 2022, 10:11:06 PM
The rights stance on abortion just freaking kills them.

They'd have so much more success and support if they tweaked their argument to be something akin to abortions are repulsive and immoral, therefore the government shouldn't subsidize them. (instead of their current insane view point of making them illegal and having these insane penalties). The libertarian wing of the right is losing to these Bible thumpers
Fiscal conservatism isn't popular enough (for good reason since it doesn't benefit the average American) to win by itself so they've made their bed with evangelical psychos and made-up culture wars.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 13, 2022, 12:06:27 PM
Good

https://twitter.com/nytpolitics/status/1502693610051063810?t=jV6cKrswaylSaD5AY_T7oQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 15, 2022, 04:51:37 PM
I hate Richie Torres

https://twitter.com/davidgross_man/status/1503755100468228107?t=bOGuoep-bHvsnjaOv7Vg9w&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 15, 2022, 11:58:31 PM
https://twitter.com/byounger13/status/1503519085836967940?s=21

This lady cannot stay sober at work
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 16, 2022, 05:47:24 AM
https://twitter.com/byounger13/status/1503519085836967940?s=21

This lady cannot stay sober at work
Cut her some slack, she 150 years old and it's hard goddamn work holding up those prize winning milkers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 16, 2022, 06:45:35 PM
Cut her some slack, she 150 years old and it's hard goddamn work holding up those prize winning milkers.
150?  Definitely some slack in those milk-curtains

"...jailbait.........wouldn't"
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5c/Ulysses_S._Grant_1870-1880.jpg/180px-Ulysses_S._Grant_1870-1880.jpg)

Nancy then as with now...
"they take a licking' n' taste like chicken"
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/Moreau_de_Tours_-_Jeune_mčre.jpg/184px-Moreau_de_Tours_-_Jeune_mčre.jpg)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 16, 2022, 10:50:32 PM
https://twitter.com/mjs_dc/status/1504161398905053184?s=21

Not reading this excrement but whoever’s involved with this bill should be out of a job
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 17, 2022, 06:59:17 AM
https://twitter.com/mjs_dc/status/1504161398905053184?s=21

Not reading this excrement but whoever’s involved with this bill should be out of a job

Dude should have been aborted with a coat hanger.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 17, 2022, 10:57:07 AM
Much needed

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1504478392615260161?t=wzxEsp47pL7OloCvSqPmzQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 17, 2022, 11:24:53 AM
Much needed

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1504478392615260161?t=wzxEsp47pL7OloCvSqPmzQ&s=19

Oh FFS
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 17, 2022, 11:30:23 AM
Much needed

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1504478392615260161?t=wzxEsp47pL7OloCvSqPmzQ&s=19
Topless hopefully
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 17, 2022, 01:40:42 PM
Oh FFS
https://twitter.com/EoinHiggins_/status/1504526257291243528?t=nn1AYkwID1VHs13Y3fs-LQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 17, 2022, 02:37:48 PM
https://twitter.com/EoinHiggins_/status/1504526257291243528?t=nn1AYkwID1VHs13Y3fs-LQ&s=19

No. Not listening. Not reading. Make it go away.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 17, 2022, 02:44:45 PM
Anyone ever seen Bono and Sean Penn in the same room?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 17, 2022, 02:55:03 PM
Anyone ever seen Bono and Sean Penn in the same room?
I heard they DP'd Madonna
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 17, 2022, 03:07:14 PM
I heard they DP'd Madonna

Who hasn't?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 17, 2022, 03:16:51 PM
I heard they DP'd Madonna
Whether pushing a car or pulling a train,
with Madonna Ciccone it is all the same...

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bf/Madonna-04.jpg/320px-Madonna-04.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/1/1a/2-Pin_Plug.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 18, 2022, 07:12:46 AM
Quote
Lindy Li
@lindyli
·
Mar 15
Russia has sanctioned Biden, Hunter Biden, Hillary Clinton, Blinken, Psaki and other Biden admin officials

Notably missing from the list?

Trump and any Republicans

As if we needed any more proof that the GOP is the Government of Putin


MJ will be singing the Russian anthem like Nikolai Volkoff.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 18, 2022, 07:25:01 AM
Lindy Li is functionally indisguishable from a Republican
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 18, 2022, 07:48:35 AM
Odd they sanctioned the people who are in power and not the people who aren't in power.

What is this madness!?

Especially since these are purely symbolic sanctions, now none of these people can vacation or access their bank accounts in the exotic climate of Russia.

Oh fiddles
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 18, 2022, 07:56:14 AM
Odd they sanctioned the people who are in power and not the people who aren't in power.

What is this madness!?

Sanctions were applied to Russians who aren't in power either, including the wealthy. I think that was her point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 18, 2022, 08:03:36 AM
Sanctions were applied to Russians who aren't in power either, including the wealthy. I think that was her point.

Those aren't symbolic sanctions though
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 18, 2022, 08:21:57 AM
Odd they sanctioned the people who are in power and not the people who aren't in power.

What is this madness!?

Especially since these are purely symbolic sanctions, now none of these people can vacation or access their bank accounts in the exotic climate of Russia.

Oh fiddles

The comparison is Canada, where they sanctioned the entire government on both sides of the House. Although that might just be because they looked at the list and thought "freak it, can't be bothered figuring out which ones matter, got more important things to do".

I'm not sure what they've done in the UK but given the Russians' purchase of the British government is even more blatant than the US (they're currently defending Johnson nominating the son of a KGB officer for a peerage and a seat in the House of Lords, the British equivalent of the Senate) I imagine they're leaving well alone, given the spectacular success they've had with taking ownership of that country.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 18, 2022, 01:12:34 PM
All about the Benjamins

https://twitter.com/jacobkornbluh/status/1504851562941853702?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 18, 2022, 01:17:20 PM
appears this isn't finding any footing here in the good old U.S.

https://twitter.com/ZTPetrizzo/status/1504502157646647299
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 18, 2022, 01:33:22 PM
appears this isn't finding any footing here in the good old U.S.

https://twitter.com/ZTPetrizzo/status/1504502157646647299
I think the people most likely to have participated in this shot their wad on 1/6
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 18, 2022, 05:31:03 PM
Apparently every aggressive Beltway driver is ANTIFA.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 18, 2022, 07:23:27 PM
Ohioooooo

https://twitter.com/natalie_allison/status/1504957031932907523?t=cxc6iwZ3FqZG8k8pITPzvQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 18, 2022, 09:05:22 PM
I think the people most likely to have participated in this shot their wad on 1/6
whatever.....far as I'm concerned,  good,  ef 'em.....other, more pressing (read: bigger) fish to fry...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 22, 2022, 10:46:25 AM
Predictable

https://twitter.com/GOP/status/1506282786843410432?t=vG6xZJuIM4y-Yev5ebqQ9Q&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 22, 2022, 10:55:47 AM
Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 22, 2022, 10:57:33 AM

MJ will be singing the Russian anthem like Nikolai Volkoff.

Lol, any absolute other absolute twitter dumpster fires you feel like sharing next? Palmer Report perhaps? Maybe that freaking shill brooklyndaddefiant? How about Aaron Rupar?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 22, 2022, 10:59:36 AM
Predictable

https://twitter.com/GOP/status/1506282786843410432?t=vG6xZJuIM4y-Yev5ebqQ9Q&s=19

I got it, they should conjure up rape allegations instead!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 22, 2022, 11:23:00 AM
I'll take your deflection as admission that Repulican crying about CRT is entirely phony.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 22, 2022, 11:34:09 AM
I'll take your deflection as admission that Repulican crying about CRT is entirely phony.

It's not a deflection, it's an example to show how absolutely benign and milquetoast this hearing is (where someone's record is actually the focus) as opposed to the utter circus and disgusting charade that was the Kavanaugh fiasco.

As far as CRT, I'm over the argument when in the face of demonstrated proof that absolute societal poison is being taught to our kids I get nothing but idiotic platitudes and the equivalent of people covering their ears and eyes using either a Christopher Rufo tweet taken totally out of context as their justification, or the defense of ItS NoT bEiNg TaUgHt AnYwAy.

Plenty of non-Republicans have spoken out against this excrement, but I get that it's an issue considering it's going to make the mid-terms even more brutal of a debacle for Democrats then they normally would be with a sitting President occupying the executive branch anyway.

Anyway, amazing how this place has been utterly silent on the media literally colluding with a political candidate to bury a story under the guise of 'MiSiNfOrMaTiON" when exactly do pieces of lowlife excrement like Brennan, Clapper et al get called out for relying on MuH rUsSiA yet again to run cover for Biden?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 22, 2022, 11:53:37 AM
"CRT is when someone is black"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 22, 2022, 01:54:46 PM
I wonder what Lindsey Graham would act like if he was just comfortable and supported enough to be who he really is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on March 22, 2022, 02:18:12 PM
I wonder what Lindsey Graham would act like if he was just comfortable and supported enough to be who he really is.
He would still be a spineless dickbag.  He'd just be an openly gay spineless dickbag.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 22, 2022, 03:16:24 PM
He would still be a spineless dickbag.  He'd just be an openly gay spineless dickbag.

IDK, I think a lot of it is informed by the self loathing. Also blackmail.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 22, 2022, 03:28:57 PM
(https://i.redd.it/2i47i6itvyo81.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 22, 2022, 04:30:26 PM
So Cruz, who still constantly looks like he's trying to figure out if anyone can smell that he excrement himself, has moved from trying to downplay the Kavanaugh rape allegations back to CRT. I guess this is what happens when his spring break plans are interrupted.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 22, 2022, 07:23:32 PM
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1506419769196662797?t=YNok3KwTsk89qdpOTyht7w&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 22, 2022, 10:58:48 PM
https://twitter.com/ggreenwald/status/1506419769196662797?t=YNok3KwTsk89qdpOTyht7w&s=19

The left struggles to call Putin a war criminal but talks about the extreme war crimes of Bush and Rump

Dudes delusional
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 23, 2022, 06:24:59 AM
The left struggles to call Putin a war criminal

No.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 23, 2022, 06:27:22 AM


Dudes delusional

Ironic
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 27, 2022, 11:41:22 AM
Rep. Jeff Fortenberry lied to the Feds about receiving $$ from a foreign billionaire which is a no-no.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/26/us/politics/jeff-fortenberry-resigns.amp.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on March 27, 2022, 01:53:56 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/26/us/politics/biden-billionaires-minimum-tax.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/26/us/politics/biden-billionaires-minimum-tax.html)

Somebody check in on dcm
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 27, 2022, 08:47:49 PM
"I'll tell you a secret....most people don't know what capitalism is..."

https://twitter.com/Timcast/status/1504804216971350022
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 27, 2022, 09:06:59 PM
She's right, and Dim Tool has extra chromosomes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 27, 2022, 09:09:19 PM
She's right, and Dim Tool has extra chromosomes

She is 100% right. Also she's so freaking hot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 27, 2022, 10:00:37 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/26/us/politics/biden-billionaires-minimum-tax.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2022/03/26/us/politics/biden-billionaires-minimum-tax.html)

Somebody check in on dcm

I believe I've stated on here I'd support increased taxes on the true mega rich, not the pretend mega rich.

This would be a tax on the true mega rich. I'm okay with that.

The vague wording about capital gains is concerning though. If this is only applicable to people worth 100+ million fine, if the capital gains thing applies to everyone, then sleepy joe needs to go take a nap
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 27, 2022, 10:03:01 PM
She's right that most people don't know anything

But that also includes her.

I also find it absurd that she thinks that you need to be a billionaire to benefit from capitalism.

Or that people are dying in the streets because they don't have insulin
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 27, 2022, 10:48:44 PM
She's right, and Dim Tool has extra chromosomes
Lol
She is 100% right. Also she's so freaking hot.
100% lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 27, 2022, 11:42:31 PM


She's right that most people don't know anything

[...]

Or that people are dying in the streets because they don't have insulin

Ironic
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 28, 2022, 12:22:13 AM

Ironic

I know there was the great insulin pandemic of 2021

Had everyone wearing masks and everything

FWIW I Googled it

And apparently 4 people died in 2017 and another 4 in 2018 from rationing insulin.

How the freak they came up with that, nobody knows.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 28, 2022, 09:02:29 AM


FWIW I Googled it

Good, so you learned something
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 28, 2022, 09:52:51 AM
I see the horsefaced jackass opened her mouth again to offer her special brand of "truth."

What an absolute ignoramus.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 28, 2022, 09:54:48 AM
"AOC is dumb because I said something dumb and said she said it"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 28, 2022, 09:56:27 AM
"AOC is dumb because I said something dumb and said she said it"

Lol, no that's not why she's a freaking idiot but ok.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 28, 2022, 04:57:52 PM
Love how Boebert/MTG's entire base is people who think AOC is dumber than them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 28, 2022, 05:03:22 PM
Love how Boebert/MTG's entire base is people who think AOC is dumber than them.

I wouldn't mind if all politicians were as dumb as Boebert/AOC if they were all as hot
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 28, 2022, 08:36:33 PM
I wouldn't mind if all politicians were as dumb as Boebert/AOC if they were all as hot
Boebert? hot?

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9d/Groucho_glasses.jpg/320px-Groucho_glasses.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 29, 2022, 12:19:05 AM
Boebert? hot?

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/9d/Groucho_glasses.jpg/320px-Groucho_glasses.jpg)

Are you suggesting she's not?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 29, 2022, 07:27:07 AM
Are you suggesting she's not?

I'd hate freak a baby into her demon womb....kickstarting the book of Revelations.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 29, 2022, 07:37:16 AM
Are you suggesting she's not?
Once she spoke, she ruined it.  She isn't hot enough to overcome that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 29, 2022, 11:08:53 AM
Are you suggesting she's not?

From the neck down she's the Humpty Dance.  North of her neck she's Shock G

(https://media.giphy.com/media/zXiOWxt2OR4L6QXUAR/giphy.gif)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Humpty_Dance#/media/File:Humptydancesingle.jpg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on March 29, 2022, 12:42:57 PM
From the neck down she's the Humpty Dance.  North of her neck she's Shock G

(https://media.giphy.com/media/zXiOWxt2OR4L6QXUAR/giphy.gif)

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Humpty_Dance#/media/File:Humptydancesingle.jpg
Greatest song in the history of music.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 29, 2022, 01:29:30 PM
The fireplace below - check
The mantlepiece - check
The portrait on top - pass

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Lauren_Boebert.JPG/345px-Lauren_Boebert.JPG)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 04, 2022, 10:34:58 AM
https://twitter.com/kidfears99/status/1510716796940300299?s=21&t=7mZKUNBnyuQrr4pKOI3vzQ
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 04, 2022, 10:37:58 AM
The fireplace below - check
The mantlepiece - check
The portrait on top - pass

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Lauren_Boebert.JPG/345px-Lauren_Boebert.JPG)



Pelosi way hotter
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on April 04, 2022, 10:39:51 AM
Pelosi way hotter

yeah...but...Boebert gives you the option to DP her with your dong and the barrel of that glock in her poopchute.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 04, 2022, 12:06:16 PM
yeah...but...Boebert gives you the option to DP her with your dong and the barrel of that glock in her poopchute.

Sounds like a great way to lose your dong.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on April 04, 2022, 12:08:55 PM
Sounds like a great way to lose your dong.
Live on the edge
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 04, 2022, 03:31:18 PM
Live on the edge

You know what? You should go for it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on April 04, 2022, 03:40:57 PM
You know what? You should go for it.
*makes sure the safety is on*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 04, 2022, 06:32:43 PM
*makes sure the safety is on*
#safesexisgoodsex

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fb/Penis-pistol.jpg/320px-Penis-pistol.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 04, 2022, 06:50:10 PM
*makes sure the safety is on*

It doesn't take a lot of force to click that off, just FYI. Better let her ride.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 05, 2022, 12:32:48 PM
Tennessee "one man, one woman" marriage bill conspicuously missing age restrictions.

https://www.wjhl.com/news/regional/tennessee/gop-bill-would-eliminate-age-requirements-for-marriages-in-tennessee/ (https://www.wjhl.com/news/regional/tennessee/gop-bill-would-eliminate-age-requirements-for-marriages-in-tennessee/)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on April 06, 2022, 01:46:14 PM
(https://i.redd.it/gcg6vr0lpwr81.jpg)

Not OK
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on April 06, 2022, 01:46:59 PM
Horrible
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on April 06, 2022, 01:47:37 PM
(https://i.redd.it/gcg6vr0lpwr81.jpg)

Not OK

umm..wow.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 06, 2022, 01:56:54 PM
(https://i.redd.it/gcg6vr0lpwr81.jpg)

Not OK
Watch where you yank your crank in OK.  One errant ricochet and you're a felon.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 06, 2022, 02:19:41 PM
Give Oklahoma back.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on April 06, 2022, 02:25:52 PM
no abortions, but i'm sure inbreeding is welcomed.  freaking hicks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 06, 2022, 03:42:53 PM
and on the flip side, Colorado has passed legislation allowing abortions at any stage of pregnancy.

Extremist lunacy everywhere.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 06, 2022, 04:08:05 PM
Derelicts and religious fanatics dictate public policy in this country
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 06, 2022, 04:21:18 PM
On a somewhat unrelated note, totally honest question here for everyone.  Do you ever get to a point where it's difficult to balance "being informed" and so pissed off that it's better to just not read about politics anymore?

I think I'm kinda there now.  I'd rather ignore  a lot of the political theater that's going on now at the risk of being uninformed.  At some point the annoyance isn't worth the information.  I'd rather be a little blissfully unaware and happier.  Not completely, just some.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 06, 2022, 04:31:19 PM
On a somewhat unrelated note, totally honest question here for everyone.  Do you ever get to a point where it's difficult to balance "being informed" and so pissed off that it's better to just not read about politics anymore?

I think I'm kinda there now.  I'd rather ignore  a lot of the political theater that's going on now at the risk of being uninformed.  At some point the annoyance isn't worth the information.  I'd rather be a little blissfully unaware and happier.  Not completely, just some.


That's why my political obnoxiousness on this board  has decreased like 95% over the years.

Partially because I realized this "team" ideology bullshit is freaking retarded. But also because I realized what's the freaking point in arguing with someone about political excrement when statistically its impossible for someone to change their mind about something they're decided on, and because I understand that the only thing that comes from these arguments is people get annoyed fight and turn into a bunch of pretencious cunts.

 This is why my tolerance for arguing politics has become about 5 to 10 minutes before I roll over and die. And it gives me more time and energy to focus on the things that matter, like Becton's body fat percentage
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 06, 2022, 04:33:26 PM
That's why my political obnoxiousness on this board  has decreased like 95% over the years.

Partially because I realized this "team" ideology bullshit is freaking retarded. But also because I realized what's the freaking point in arguing with someone about political excrement when statistically its impossible for someone to change their mind about something they're decided on, and because I understand that the only thing that comes from these arguments is people get annoyed fight and turn into a bunch of pretencious cunts.

 This is why my tolerance for arguing politics has become about 5 to 10 minutes before I roll over and die. And it gives me more time and energy to focus on the things that matter, like Becton's body fat percentage
  Same here.  The sad reality is that the people that stir up all this excrement are the ones that get heard.  My alternative focus is the draft trade chart.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 06, 2022, 04:33:58 PM
Partially because I realized this "team" ideology bullshit is freaking retarded. But also because I realized what's the freaking point in arguing with someone about political excrement when statistically its impossible for someone to change their mind about something they're decided on, and because I understand that the only thing that comes from these arguments is people get annoyed fight and turn into a bunch of pretencious cunts.

I don't think that's true. I disagree to some extent with Badger and mj on a pretty hefty portion of their positions, but I always listen to both of them and I think I've probably adjusted my views on multiple things in both of their directions at various points in their past.

If you've decided that the problem with discussing politics with people is that it's pointless because they don't listen to you and don't get any smarter, then maybe you're the problem. I'm more interested in educating me than I am in educating others.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 06, 2022, 04:38:47 PM
I don't think that's true. I disagree to some extent with Badger and mj on a pretty hefty portion of their positions, but I always listen to both of them and I think I've probably adjusted my views on multiple things in both of their directions at various points in their past.

If you've decided that the problem with discussing politics with people is that it's pointless because they don't listen to you and don't get any smarter, then maybe you're the problem. I'm more interested in educating me than I am in educating others.

Sure but is it unreasonable to say that you're a fairly reasonable person? And are things you shift your ideology on things you're passionate on and have strong positions on, or jsut things you have an opinion on and nothing else?

I believe there was a big study done years ago on vaccination hesitancy (before Covid-19). And the researchers found that talking about bird watching was just as likely to change someone's opinions on vaccines as was statistics and data. (however they did find that showing them pictures of kids dying or suffering from diseases preventable by vaccines did help)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 06, 2022, 04:48:34 PM

If you've decided that the problem with discussing politics with people is that it's pointless because they don't listen to you and don't get any smarter, then maybe you're the problem. I'm more interested in educating me than I am in educating others.

It very much depends on the people you are talking to.  If you think it's not pointless to talk to some people, I'd like to introduce you to the internet, specifically Twitter.  Honestly, I'm just talking about politics on the internet in general.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 06, 2022, 04:53:42 PM
Sure but is it unreasonable to say that you're a fairly reasonable person? And are things you shift your ideology on things you're passionate on and have strong positions on, or jsut things you have an opinion on and nothing else?

I believe there was a big study done years ago on vaccination hesitancy (before Covid-19). And the researchers found that talking about bird watching was just as likely to change someone's opinions on vaccines as was statistics and data. (however they did find that showing them pictures of kids dying or suffering from diseases preventable by vaccines did help)

Depends what you mean by "reasonable", I'm definitely politically more moderate than either of them on most things (by moderate I'm talking in the Overton sense, not the dictionary definition) but that doesn't mean that some views held by people who we would categorise as being at the further reaches of the spectrum can't be reasonable.

There are views I hold more strongly, either because I feel very confident in my knowledge of why I hold them or simply because of innate "rightness". There are policies and views about which I have a general feeling but would like to understand more perspectives, in order to further inform my own position. But even on those things about which I'm pretty sure I'm right I'll listen to those I disagree with, because even if my position is one of wanting to persuade them of why they're wrong I have to first understand why they think the way they do.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 06, 2022, 05:07:40 PM
I don't think that's true. I disagree to some extent with Badger and mj on a pretty hefty portion of their positions, but I always listen to both of them and I think I've probably adjusted my views on multiple things in both of their directions at various points in their past.

If you've decided that the problem with discussing politics with people is that it's pointless because they don't listen to you and don't get any smarter, then maybe you're the problem. I'm more interested in educating me than I am in educating others.
re: the in bold above 

Not trying to be a provocative jerk JE but you really think so?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 06, 2022, 05:10:30 PM
re: the in bold above 

Not trying to be a provocative jerk JE but you really think so?

LOL yes. And Badger fairly significantly with both my views and actions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 06, 2022, 05:29:29 PM
re: the in bold above 

Not trying to be a provocative jerk JE but you really think so?

I disagree with both significantly but I'd definitely say there's a difference between the two.

I think there's a generational difference. JE tends to have more of an older person's liberal viewpoint  and Badger more like these younger ones
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 06, 2022, 05:34:37 PM
I disagree with both significantly but I'd definitely say there's a difference between the two.

I think there's a generational difference. JE tends to have more of an older person's liberal viewpoint  and Badger more like these younger ones

I'd say that's fair-ish. I'd like to make the world a little nicer for the generations coming behind me, as long as it doesn't cost me too much. Badger wants to burn down the whole shitpile that we've made for them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on April 06, 2022, 05:34:47 PM
I disagree with both significantly but I'd definitely say there's a difference between the two.

I think there's a generational difference. JE tends to have more of an older person's liberal viewpoint  and Badger more like these younger ones

JE is the Clark Griswold of JO.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 06, 2022, 06:01:37 PM
JE is the Clark Griswold of JO.

He does seem like he would appreciate a good country squire
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 06, 2022, 10:27:02 PM
^^^
honest question...honest answers.  thx

He does seem like he would appreciate a good country squire
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d3/1969_Ford_LTD_Country_Squire.jpg/1024px-1969_Ford_LTD_Country_Squire.jpg)

Watching Obama return to the WH today I truly felt sorry for Joe as he at one point was being flat out ignored by all who flocked around and fussed over 'BMOC' OB.....there he was, the current president of the united states, slowly, sadly shuffling off to the side...by himself.  'Twas not a good look Kammy & co.

truly kinda sad  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QGRxVITBGOA  ...the champions of compassions--haha...

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 07, 2022, 11:57:13 AM
and on the flip side, Colorado has passed legislation allowing abortions at any stage of pregnancy.

Extremist lunacy everywhere.
No, because nobody gets an abortion at 39 weeks for lols. Not even close to equivalent.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 07, 2022, 12:01:47 PM
For the record, there are ZERO states in the union that have majority support for total abortion bans. Our sad attempt at pretending to be a functional democracy continues to become less believable.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on April 07, 2022, 12:35:53 PM
On a somewhat unrelated note, totally honest question here for everyone.  Do you ever get to a point where it's difficult to balance "being informed" and so pissed off that it's better to just not read about politics anymore?

Yes, and I think IDing that in yourself is really important. I try to stay tapped into local excrement as much as possible, but I will often sit out even reading about a lot of national political excrement. Too much to lose in terms of my well-being, and so little to gain. That being said talking about politics on the internet is largely where I started in terms of developing a coherent political ideology, and I think it can be a genuinely good place to develop more nuance(depending on where you go, how open you are to information, etc etc.) But there are too many infuriating things that are happening that I can't realistically influence it doesn't make sense for me to contribute to the continuous outrage machine that is modern political news.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 07, 2022, 12:41:37 PM
Yes, and I think IDing that in yourself is really important. I try to stay tapped into local excrement as much as possible, but I will often sit out even reading about a lot of national political excrement. Too much to lose in terms of my well-being, and so little to gain. That being said talking about politics on the internet is largely where I started in terms of developing a coherent political ideology, and I think it can be a genuinely good place to develop more nuance(depending on where you go, how open you are to information, etc etc.) But there are too many infuriating things that are happening that I can't realistically influence it doesn't make sense for me to contribute to the continuous outrage machine that is modern political news.
That was worded much better than what I said. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on April 07, 2022, 12:49:07 PM
No, because nobody gets an abortion at 39 weeks for lols. Not even close to equivalent.

Something like 99% of abortions happen before 21 weeks, and over 90% in the first 13 weeks. The majority of those happening outside of the 21 weeks are on the earlier side rather than the later side. If someone is getting an abortion after those 21 weeks, something has either gone really wrong in the pregnancy, they didn't have a realistic opportunity for an abortion before that time, or due to shitty health infrastructure and knowledge, they didn't know that they were pregnant. Of course, my extreme opinion is that the government doesn't have the obligation to 'protect' a fetus over a person's bodily autonomy at any stage of pregnancy, but I'd be willing to compromise and settle for funding strong enough preventative reproductive health care options and early abortions to really target cutting out those 21+ week abortions
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 07, 2022, 01:33:47 PM
No, because nobody gets an abortion at 39 weeks for lols. Not even close to equivalent.

And the amount of times someone gets an abortion for rape/incest is similarly miniscule, we can do this all day.

If the specific legislation in Colorado prohibited abortion in a late term situation except for an exception re: health of the mother it wouldn't be an issue, but of course it doesn't.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 07, 2022, 01:44:49 PM
And the amount of times someone gets an abortion for rape/incest is similarly miniscule, we can do this all day.

If the specific legislation in Colorado prohibited abortion in a late term situation except for an exception re: health of the mother it wouldn't be an issue, but of course it doesn't.

Why do you need to legislate discretion though? Given an abortion is an action that can only be performed by a physician, and that physicians are already tightly regulated, why legislate it at all and risk creating a situation in which people agree that an abortion is appropriate but the legislation that a bunch of non-physicians drafted didn't anticipate it and thus bans it? As a conservative, are you not opposed to excessive legislation and government interference?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 07, 2022, 01:49:28 PM
Missouri's ban on abortion in the case of ectopic pregnancies is just confounding.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 07, 2022, 02:10:56 PM
Justice Ketanji Brown Jackson.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 07, 2022, 07:07:54 PM
And now, heeerrre's Ketanji!!

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d1/Ketanji_Brown_Jackson_%28robe_photo%29.jpg/171px-Ketanji_Brown_Jackson_%28robe_photo%29.jpg)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7Hcqb3hAmr8
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 07, 2022, 07:28:52 PM
Now we need a transgender Latino homosexual on the Supreme Court.

I hope the next president we have is someone with the integrity to make it a priority to select the next Supreme Court Justice based on a bunch of things that have nothing whatsoever to do with their ability to do the job
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 07, 2022, 07:43:46 PM
For the record, there are ZERO states in the union that have majority support for total abortion bans. Our sad attempt at pretending to be a functional democracy continues to become less believable.
We are not a direct democracy but a representative democracy, i.e. there''s always the vote the bums out redress option.  Additionally, this 'maybe baby' issue's not the only issue where gov't policy's NOT in tune with the populace. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 07, 2022, 09:06:51 PM
Now we need a transgender Latino homosexual on the Supreme Court.

I hope the next president we have is someone with the integrity to make it a priority to select the next Supreme Court Justice based on a bunch of things that have nothing whatsoever to do with their ability to do the job
So she's not qualified?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 12, 2022, 03:33:52 PM
Red Dawn just seems so implausible right now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 12, 2022, 05:41:52 PM
So she's not qualified?

Considering her rate of being overturned during her limited time on the circuit court...no. She's really not.

Some of the criticisms being levied from the right on her candidacy are freaking absolutely stupid (looking at you Ted Cruz), but her desire to legislate from the bench should've been disqualifying. Instead of course Mitt Murkowski and Collins went along with it.

Amazing how they weren't met with the media fury that say Joe Manchin and Mama Sinema were when breaking party rank. Interesting that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 13, 2022, 01:17:16 PM
Considering her rate of being overturned during her limited time on the circuit court...no. She's really not.

Some of the criticisms being levied from the right on her candidacy are freaking absolutely stupid (looking at you Ted Cruz), but her desire to legislate from the bench should've been disqualifying. Instead of course Mitt Murkowski and Collins went along with it.

Amazing how they weren't met with the media fury that say Joe Manchin and Mama Sinema were when breaking party rank. Interesting that.
   (https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9b/What_Liberal_Media.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 14, 2022, 03:30:50 PM
Something something death of free speech

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/04/directv-dropped-oan-today-rejecting-gop-pleas-to-keep-right-wing-network/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 14, 2022, 04:08:35 PM
Something something death of free speech

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2022/04/directv-dropped-oan-today-rejecting-gop-pleas-to-keep-right-wing-network/

I have zero idea what that network is nor have I ever been a direct TV customer.

But this has to be kind of concerning to see this behavior.

A glaring example is this excerpt

Quote
US Reps. Anna Eshoo (D-Calif.) and Jerry McNerney (D-Calif.) had also questioned DirecTV owner AT&T and other TV providers about why they carry OAN, Newsmax, and Fox News.

They disagree with me so take them off the air, sounds like something that would be popular in China
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 14, 2022, 04:11:54 PM
I have zero idea what that network is nor have I ever been a direct TV customer.

But this has to be kind of concerning to see this behavior.

A glaring example is this excerpt

They disagree with me so take them off the air, sounds like something that would be popular in China

Now quote the rest of the paragraph that preceded the line you're upset about.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 14, 2022, 04:55:58 PM
Now quote the rest of the paragraph that preceded the line you're upset about.

You mean the paragraph that was talking about a network that is neither Fox nor Newsmax?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 14, 2022, 05:06:36 PM
You mean the paragraph that was talking about a network that is neither Fox nor Newsmax?

The paragraph that was talking about why they want carriers such as DirecTV to question whether it's right for them to be providing a platform for networks who peddle clear untruths as news. Or are you saying that Newsmax and Fox don't commit that particular sin?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 14, 2022, 05:29:48 PM
The paragraph that was talking about why they want carriers such as DirecTV to question whether it's right for them to be providing a platform for networks who peddle clear untruths as news. Or are you saying that Newsmax and Fox don't commit that particular sin?

I'm suggesting that I don't think politicians should be lobbying for TV providers to get rid of networks that don't align with their particular views.

You 100% could argue that those networks peddled falsehoods, but you could dissect literally every single network for telling lies just as big and bad.

I didn't support Trump with his vendetta for CNN either, but then again the whole world is well aware of his mental instability
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 14, 2022, 05:37:03 PM
The paragraph that was talking about why they want carriers such as DirecTV to question whether it's right for them to be providing a platform for networks who peddle clear untruths as news. Or are you saying that Newsmax and Fox don't commit that particular sin?

No. Only they do.

The fact that politicians are weighing in on this in such a blindly partisan manner (i.e. not additionally calling out MSNBC or CNN for the obvious hoaxes they perpetrate, covington and the russian collusion narrative being the first two I can think of off the top of my head) tells me all I need to know about what an absolute attempt at a power grab this is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 14, 2022, 06:48:51 PM
No. Only they do.

The fact that politicians are weighing in on this in such a blindly partisan manner (i.e. not additionally calling out MSNBC or CNN for the obvious hoaxes they perpetrate, covington and the russian collusion narrative being the first two I can think of off the top of my head) tells me all I need to know about what an absolute attempt at a power grab this is.

In what way is it a "power grab"?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 14, 2022, 06:59:32 PM
In what way is it a "power grab"?

Sitting politicians literally using their position to attempt to get channels which are ideologically opposed to them removed from the air under the guise of “misinformation” while of course conveniently ignoring networks which actively spew easily verifiable falsehoods but tow the DNC company lines.

What could possibly be the problem with this I wonder.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 14, 2022, 07:07:12 PM
Sitting politicians literally using their position to attempt to get channels which are ideologically opposed to them removed from the air under the guise of “misinformation” while of course conveniently ignoring networks which actively spew easily verifiable falsehoods but tow the DNC company lines.

What could possibly be the problem with this I wonder.

I think that politicians calling out abuse of broadcasting networks for creating and perpetuating falsehoods is an appropriate thing for them to do. I'm trying to recall you being upset about Trump going after networks he felt were doing that.

I don't think I'd characterise it as a power grab.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 14, 2022, 07:13:24 PM
I think that politicians calling out abuse of broadcasting networks for creating and perpetuating falsehoods is an appropriate thing for them to do. I'm trying to recall you being upset about Trump going after networks he felt were doing that.

I don't think I'd characterise it as a power grab.

I don’t recall Trump actively using his position to try and have carriers remove said networks off the air.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 14, 2022, 07:35:57 PM
I don’t recall Trump actively using his position to try and have carriers remove said networks off the air.


OK, so then you agree that it's OK for politicians to call out what they perceive to be unfair or unreasonable broadcasting, and we're just debating what actions are appropriate.

Removal of access to White House press conferences for national news organisations - fine
Calling for broadcasters to consider whether they should be carrying networks who spread falsehoods - not fine

Let's be honest with ourselves here - DirecTV didn't drop OAN out of a sense of loyalty and morality, they dropped them because they don't generate enough revenue to compensate for the headache. They're obviously not dropping Fox no matter how many politicians whine or how loudly they do it, so this isn't really a political decision as much as it is a commercial one. So Maybe Biden should simply pull Fox's press credentials instead? After all, we've established that that's an acceptable thing to do when news networks say things you don't like.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 14, 2022, 08:03:01 PM
So Maybe Biden should simply pull Fox's press credentials instead? After all, we've established that that's an acceptable thing to do when news networks say things you don't like.

Part of why FOX and for that matter in a broader sense conservatives in general are suckers is because when Trump's administration did this to lying sack of excrement propagandist Jim Acosta (and to be sure, it should've been done to Yamiche Alcindor as well), FOX and other conservative media fell over themselves to decry the move and defend Acosta.

Does anyone actually believe with a straight face that if Peter Doocy had his credentials pulled tomorrow, CNN, NYT, etc etc etc would respond in kind? Of course they wouldn't.

Biden called him a son of a bitch and I must have missed the avalanche of articles and commentary discussing how inappropriate it is that the sitting President would be so antagonistic towards a member of the free press.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 14, 2022, 08:18:04 PM
Part of why FOX and for that matter in a broader sense conservatives in general are suckers is because when Trump's administration did this to lying sack of excrement propagandist Jim Acosta (and to be sure, it should've been done to Yamiche Alcindor as well), FOX and other conservative media fell over themselves to decry the move and defend Acosta.

Does anyone actually believe with a straight face that if Peter Doocy had his credentials pulled tomorrow, CNN, NYT, etc etc etc would respond in kind? Of course they wouldn't.

Biden called him a son of a bitch and I must have missed the avalanche of articles and commentary discussing how inappropriate it is that the sitting President would be so antagonistic towards a member of the free press.

That's a pretty slanted recollection of events, I think. And before Acosta it was Kaitlin Collins, I don't recall a huge outcry demanding that she be reinstated (presumably because she's viewed as a turncoat by both sides).

I don't think you can complain about the current President's behaviour towards "members of the free press" when your guy set the precedent. The Doocy incident was a hot mic, not just an overinflated ego throwing a tantrum - and unlike Trump, Biden has also apologised to Doocy (and Collins). I'm not defending Biden per se, but I don't think you really have any scope for holding his feet to the fire given how much, and how much worse, you allowed for with Trump. One is not an iconoclastic firebrand bringing a breath of fresh air to politics and the other a disrespectful POS for doing similar things.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 14, 2022, 08:27:14 PM
That's a pretty slanted recollection of events, I think. 

With few exceptions (I don't know this to be sure but I'd be surprised if Breitbarts reaction wasn't LOLFUCKACOSTA), Fox, Dailywire, Nat Review, they all condemned Acosta getting his press pass revoked.

I don't think you can complain about the current President's behaviour towards "members of the free press" when your guy set the precedent. The Doocy incident was a hot mic, not just an overinflated ego throwing a tantrum - and unlike Trump, Biden has also apologised to Doocy (and Collins). I'm not defending Biden per se, but I don't think you really have any scope for holding his feet to the fire given how much, and how much worse, you allowed for with Trump. One is not an iconoclastic firebrand bringing a breath of fresh air to politics and the other a disrespectful POS for doing similar things.

This isn't even a defense of Trump as much as its just laying out the basics.  One has the mainstream media running cover for him like they're his personal praetorian guard, the other was maligned as the next Hitler.

The way both have been covered and the treatment they've received is not the same.

FWIW, I have no problem with the demented old bat currently occupying the white house saying whatever he wants to the press, they can all eat excrement as far as I'm concerned, it's just interesting the difference in presentation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 15, 2022, 06:51:17 AM
https://twitter.com/MikeDrucker/status/1514618504237920260?t=pekNO4dg0sTcbsnnHwkrCQ&s=19 (https://twitter.com/MikeDrucker/status/1514618504237920260?t=pekNO4dg0sTcbsnnHwkrCQ&s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 15, 2022, 12:06:22 PM
That's a pretty slanted recollection of events, I think.

And before Acosta it was Kaitlin Collins, I don't recall a huge outcry demanding that she be reinstated (presumably because she's viewed as a turncoat by both sides).

Jay Wallace, president of Fox News, issued a statement in support of Collins, saying that his organization "stood in strong solidarity with CNN for the right to full access for our journalists as part of a free and unfettered press."   

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 15, 2022, 08:51:11 PM
https://twitter.com/MikeDrucker/status/1514618504237920260?t=pekNO4dg0sTcbsnnHwkrCQ&s=19 (https://twitter.com/MikeDrucker/status/1514618504237920260?t=pekNO4dg0sTcbsnnHwkrCQ&s=19)

It was long before 2016 that everyone the left disagreed with was being called a Nazi
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 16, 2022, 12:48:16 PM
It was long before 2016 that everyone the left disagreed with was being called a Nazi

The media maxim now sweeping the nation 

is  "when in doubt: 'russian disinformation'."

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/1979_stamp_Radio_Moscow.png/169px-1979_stamp_Radio_Moscow.png)


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 16, 2022, 01:32:23 PM
It was long before 2016 that everyone the left disagreed with was being called a Nazi

Do you ever have a post that isn't on brand?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 16, 2022, 05:57:46 PM
Do you ever have a post that isn't on brand?

Pot calling kettle?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 18, 2022, 04:59:30 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/04/14/elon-musk-twitter-bid-peak-billionaire/

Quote
So now Elon Musk wants to buy Twitter.
It wasn’t enough to loudly criticize the platform — on the platform — for not adhering to his personal standards.
Sign up for a weekly roundup of thought-provoking ideas and debates

It wasn’t enough to secretively buy a 9.2 percent stake in the social media company, becoming its largest individual shareholder. It wasn’t enough to accept an offer to join the company’s board (which provoked huge internal outcry from the company’s employees). It wasn’t even enough of a power trip for him to then reject that offer five days later.

He’s got to own it all!

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bb/Washington_Post_building.jpg/320px-Washington_Post_building.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/Jeff_Bezos%27_iconic_laugh.jpg/208px-Jeff_Bezos%27_iconic_laugh.jpg)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 18, 2022, 05:19:18 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2022/04/14/elon-musk-twitter-bid-peak-billionaire/

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bb/Washington_Post_building.jpg/320px-Washington_Post_building.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/Jeff_Bezos%27_iconic_laugh.jpg/208px-Jeff_Bezos%27_iconic_laugh.jpg)

Can't make it up. The amount of idiocy that's come out of this from the usual suspects (Robert Reich, Max Boot) is to be expected, but it's still mind numbing.

Having said that, I really wish ole Lex Luthor over there would successfully use WaPo to apply enough PR pressure to get Woody to sell the freaking team already. We came close with that story about his time as ambassador!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 18, 2022, 05:30:49 PM
There's an obvious disconnect that is being missed and/or ignored which is that WaPo is just one of many media outlets, and that they all have a voice of varying degrees of bias, while Twitter is a platform for discourse upon which all are theoretically equally loud voices and there is no realistic alternative, so it's not really reasonable to compare the two.

But I've made my views on big tech and FATANG very clear before, so I'm not really going to put up a big fight on this because I think they're all freaking brutal and need to be dismantled. While I think Musk is a raging incel weirdo I also despise Dorsey for both similar and different reasons so it's not like he'd be taking a glorious and venerable institution and corrupting it. It's already a freaking cesspit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 18, 2022, 07:09:59 PM
- There's an obvious disconnect that is being missed and/or ignored
 which is that WaPo is just one of many media outlets, and that they all have a voice of varying degrees of bias, while

- Twitter is a platform for discourse upon which all are theoretically equally loud voices and there is no realistic alternative, so it's not really reasonable to compare the two.

But I've made my views on big tech and FATANG very clear before, so I'm not really going to put up a big fight on this because I think they're all freaking brutal and need to be dismantled. While I think Musk is a raging incel weirdo I also despise Dorsey for both similar and different reasons so it's not like he'd be taking a glorious and venerable institution and corrupting it. It's already a freaking cesspit.
The conceit and inimitable condescension never fails to amuse.   

Hardly.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 18, 2022, 07:12:42 PM
The conceit and inimitable condescension never fails to amuse.   

Hardly.



Conceit?

And if you think I was being condescending, maybe stop feeling so bad about being dumb. It's not your fault.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 18, 2022, 07:39:47 PM
Conceit?

And if you think I was being condescending, maybe stop feeling so bad about being dumb. It's not your fault.

Easy killer.  The point being the goose gander single ownership was 'Wapo poo pooed' followed by a  personal opinion regarding Elon Musk as in who asked and who cares what your (irrelevant) personal opinion of him is.  I've no use for Elon Musk (and who cares); I was obviously calling attention to the double standard in play regarding ownership.  You in turn only played a highly partisan card here and emotionally at that you cantankerous dumbbell.   :-)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 18, 2022, 08:08:55 PM
Easy killer.  The point being the goose gander single ownership was 'Wapo poo pooed' followed by a  personal opinion regarding Elon Musk as in who asked and who cares what your (irrelevant) personal opinion of him is.  I've no use for Elon Musk (and who cares); I was obviously calling attention to the double standard in play regarding ownership.  You in turn only played a highly partisan card here and emotionally at that you cantankerous dumbbell.   :-)



I'm not sure it's really partisan when all I'm doing is calling out the difference between a social media platform and a media outlet. One employs people to write carefully curated content as part of a much larger landscape, the other is an open forum in which all content is created by its users. I don't really see a double standard at play unless you see WaPo as something other than a marketing organisation that exists to tell its subscriber base what they want to hear in the way they way they want to hear it in order to keep them subscribing, just like pretty much every other privately held media outlet.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 19, 2022, 02:30:08 PM
First off let's get this outta the way.  Starting off a rebuttal with a smug assumption is going to engender suggestions to in effect get off one's high horse and in this case "there's an obvious disconnect that's being missed" reeked of 'you failed to grasp' or 'this escaped you.'  And this example earlier in this very same thread  http://www.thejetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,135.msg329701.html#msg329701 suggests it's habitual.  Additionally, following it up with the "feeling bad about being dumb" swipe came off as adorable, child-like petulance.   There's no wish to further belabor the point here so I'll bag it...

As for the Wapo/Twitter disconnect, traditionally (and technically) they are apples-to-oranges however Twitter unfortunately has become fixed in place in the news ecosystem thanks in no small part to journalists integrating tweets into their news stories.  Even worse, they present tweets as content versus the time-honored journalistic traditions and standards of scrutiny and strict verification.

Journalists don't come with a 'good housekeeping' certificate and their audience is under no obligation to confer authority to them.  Journalists' credibility (and authority if you will) is based on a track record of presenting rock solid standards of news gathering: identifying informational sources, vetting, interrogating, verifying and only then communicating them.  Twitter has helped corrupt that process by increasingly becoming embedded in the journalistic regimen.  In short, journalists are using tweets as content and this slippery slope increases the probability that tweets are now being used as ipso facto markers of ordained knowledge.  Journalistic principles of scrutinizing sources through verification is a keystone to a press’s mission statement. Content otoh is mere reproduction which allows journalists to pass responsibility for content verification on to the original publisher, i.e. lazy, he-said / she-said faux journalism.   The hard page break between Wapo and Twitter has been blurred to a fairly significant extent and whatever disconnect that existed between them is pretty much yesterday's news - journalists are now sucking off the tweet teat. 

That said Twitter has helped otherwise marginalized voices attract MSM visibility, e.g. the BLM movement, so it can and sometimes serve a useful purpose.  But even so, those voices are chosen from among a select cast of characters on Twitter who are adept at generating attention.  And together with that, by giving rise to certain selected voices (whether their message is accurately verified before "going to press" i.e. tweeted), this shift in journalistic practice shifts the public discourse in a way that does not benefit journalism in general, nor the public, or democracy.

TL:DR. -  guilty.


I am versed in inverted triangles, dash-30-dash pr closures, et cetera, et cetera...nothing was missed or ignored from this end...  ; )
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 21, 2022, 01:45:55 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/04/21/florida-set-to-dissolve-disneys-reedy-creek-special-district.html

Regardless of whether you think Disney was right or wrong for doing so. Their decision to get involved in politics is about to bite them in the derriere in a massive way.

Sure they'll still be one of the biggest most powerful corporations in the world, but these certainly are undesired repercussions.

(and regardless of whether Disney should have ever had these special permissions in the first place, I don't like the idea of Republicans retaliating against Disney either)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 21, 2022, 01:48:31 PM
I don't have any love for either of them, but I'm fairly sure Florida needs Disney more than Disney needs Florida.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on April 21, 2022, 01:49:58 PM
It would also clear ~$2 billion in debt for Disney if it went through.

With that said, it's political posturing that is going to be "reviewed" and probably not change the status quo within a year when a decision is supposed to actually be made. I wouldn't expect them to actually dissolve the district once everything is blown over but you never know.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 21, 2022, 02:06:35 PM
I don't have any love for either of them, but I'm fairly sure Florida needs Disney more than Disney needs Florida.

I don't know the financial logistics.

But how much money does Disney have invested into that location?

Sure they'd make an obscene amount of money selling the land, but presumably the cost for them to move location's and any downtime/overlap in property ownership would cost them tens of billions and then some.

This is a lose lose, and I think this may end up being one of the most stupid things DeSantis ends up doing.

FWIW Disney apparently cost 400 million to build in 1971. So with inflation, technology, and all the expansions. I don't think it would be unreasonable to suggest that a hypothetical Disney move would cost less than 20 billion. And probably much more than that. Especially if they wanted it in the civilized world, and not like freaking Oklahoma or some excrement
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 21, 2022, 02:08:55 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.cnbc.com/amp/2022/04/21/florida-set-to-dissolve-disneys-reedy-creek-special-district.html

Regardless of whether you think Disney was right or wrong for doing so. Their decision to get involved in politics is about to bite them in the derriere in a massive way.

Sure they'll still be one of the biggest most powerful corporations in the world, but these certainly are undesired repercussions.

(and regardless of whether Disney should have ever had these special permissions in the first place, I don't like the idea of Republicans retaliating against Disney either)

From your article:

Quote
According to lawmakers, there’s around $1 billion in debt on the balance sheet that taxpayers would become responsible for should the special district get absorbed, leading to higher taxes.

“No one wants to take that amount of debt up,” Linda Stewart, a democrat who represents Florida’s 13th senate district, told CNBC Wednesday. “None of this makes any sense. They just bit off way more than they can chew by trying to get the Reedy Creek district dissolved ... This is a major, major issue that I don’t think it will be, in the end, very successful.”

Taxpayers would also be on the hook for any municipal improvements that Disney currently pays for, including road work.

In 2019, for example, Disney’s Orlando neighbor Universal partnered with Orange County and the state to build a 1.7-mile extension to Kirkman Road between Carrier Drive and Universal Boulevard to accommodate the company’s new park Epic Universe.

That project cost an estimated $300 million, more than half of which Universal footed. The company paid $160 million, leaving Orange County to pay $125 million and the state to pay around $16 million.

The tab for similar projects at Disney could easily pile up.

Disney declined to comment on the legislature’s efforts, but the dispute is likely to end up in court, according to David Ramba, executive director of the Florida Association of Special Districts.

Ramba said he has dissolved a number of special districts, but never any that didn’t want to be dissolved and noted that “a lot of lawyers are going to get paid” as the parties work to sort out the operational implications of this bill.

Florida law dictates that special districts created by the legislature can only be dissolved with a majority vote of the district’s landowners. For Reedy Creek, that’s the Walt Disney Company.

“Nothing is going to happen,” said Jason Pizzo, a democrat who represents the state’s 38th Senate district, during the special session Wednesday. “Everyone in this room knows this is not going to happen. I’m just tired of missing my kid’s baseball games for stuff we know is not going to happen.”

Pizzo was among several state senators who spoke out against the bill ahead of the senate vote Wednesday. Many expressed frustration during discussion on the legislature floor, calling the legislation a “revenge bill” and “political theater.”

″[The governor] wants to prove a point,” Stewart said. “He wants to prove he’s more powerful, but I don’t think he’s more powerful than Disney.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 21, 2022, 02:10:15 PM
I don't know the financial logistics.

But how much money does Disney have invested into that location?

Sure they'd make an obscene amount of money selling the land, but presumably the cost for them to move location's and any downtime/overlap in property ownership would cost them tens of billions and then some.

This is a lose lose, and I think this may end up being one of the most stupid things DeSantis ends up doing.

Yes for sure. And I don't think that logistically Disney could pull the theme parks out of Florida, for all sorts of reasons. But they're an incredibly powerful and wealthy company, and they're the kind of enemy that DeSantis really could do without because not only do they have more money than god, they also have the kind of media influence that could make or break pretty much any political career.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 21, 2022, 02:13:16 PM
Yes for sure. And I don't think that logistically Disney could pull the theme parks out of Florida, for all sorts of reasons. But they're an incredibly powerful and wealthy company, and they're the kind of enemy that DeSantis really could do without because not only do they have more money than god, they also have the kind of media influence that could make or break pretty much any political career.

Unequivocally this whole thing is flat out freaking retarded.

And it makes you wonder why a guy who has all the stars aligned to be the republican presidential nominee going against a 100 year old man with abysmal approval ratings.

All DeSantis has to do is not anything freaking retarded and he probably would be a favorite for the Whitehouse.

This makes no sense and benefits nobody.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 21, 2022, 04:18:45 PM
I don't have any love for either of them, but I'm fairly sure Florida needs Disney more than Disney needs Florida.
Need the Amazon Defense Warriors to weigh in here, by their standard DeSantis is doing something much worse than AOC.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 21, 2022, 04:19:05 PM
Big brain time

https://twitter.com/RepAndyBiggsAZ/status/1517200477322108929?t=HTZENjlY2PIfQi8D5Y7IOA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 21, 2022, 04:23:22 PM
Big brain time

https://twitter.com/RepAndyBiggsAZ/status/1517200477322108929?t=HTZENjlY2PIfQi8D5Y7IOA&s=19


Marxists also.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 21, 2022, 05:24:57 PM
Need the Amazon Defense Warriors to weigh in here, by their standard DeSantis is doing something much worse than AOC.
Who is the A.D.W. lol and why the NEED for 'them' to weigh in here?  Amazon in Queens never broke ground while Disney World's been up and running in Florida for over a half century(!) and it's doubtful they're closing shop. 

Good long range forecast: trans Mickey should soon be fuckin Goofy
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Mickey%27s_Royal_Friendship_Faire_%2827636440302%29.jpg/320px-Mickey%27s_Royal_Friendship_Faire_%2827636440302%29.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Transgender_Pride_Flag_%2832097587768%29.jpg/320px-Transgender_Pride_Flag_%2832097587768%29.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 21, 2022, 05:36:55 PM
Who is the A.D.W. lol and why the NEED for 'them' to weigh in here?  Amazon in Queens never broke ground while Disney World's been up and running in Florida for over a half century(!) and it's doubtful they're closing shop. 

Good long range forecast: trans Mickey should soon be fuckin Goofy
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Mickey%27s_Royal_Friendship_Faire_%2827636440302%29.jpg/320px-Mickey%27s_Royal_Friendship_Faire_%2827636440302%29.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/65/Transgender_Pride_Flag_%2832097587768%29.jpg/320px-Transgender_Pride_Flag_%2832097587768%29.jpg)
So telling a corporation you're not giving them a tax break isn't the end of the world, got it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 21, 2022, 05:44:56 PM
On a more somber note, the U.S. Capitol was evacuated over fears of an imminent attack.  Turns out 'the attack' was a group of U.S. Army paratroopers 'dropping in' Nationals Stadium just prior to the Diamondbacks-Nationals game.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bd/KeystoneKops.jpg/309px-KeystoneKops.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 21, 2022, 05:55:10 PM
So telling a corporation you're not giving them a tax break isn't the end of the world, got it.
Never said that.  False equivalence.  Amazon NYC never saw the light of day while tax breaks were never a non-starter in Florida in 1971.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 21, 2022, 06:10:43 PM
America, please check your pipes and call a plumber if need be, you appear to be leaking and it's getting on us.

(https://i.redd.it/2puqr1kdfxu81.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on April 21, 2022, 06:23:14 PM
America, please check your pipes and call a plumber if need be, you appear to be leaking and it's getting on us.

Trickle Down is finally working!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 23, 2022, 01:04:07 PM
I think it's precious how Republicans are now in favor of more regulation, stricter policing of speech, and the government punishing speech that dissents from their beliefs. I can feel the freedom.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 25, 2022, 02:17:39 PM
Wonder how much of a buffer the sale of the hotel got him.

https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status/1518633666758512640?t=LBgvpfTO4YzysjEP1H-FdQ&s=19 (https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status/1518633666758512640?t=LBgvpfTO4YzysjEP1H-FdQ&s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 26, 2022, 11:58:01 AM
Kamala tested positive for covid

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/26/us/politics/kamala-harris-covid-positive.amp.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 26, 2022, 12:03:00 PM
Kamala tested positive for covid

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/04/26/us/politics/kamala-harris-covid-positive.amp.html
https://twitter.com/mj_lee/status/1518989779899199488?t=ey0HGKRGm-EgousG9XC4Qg&s=19

"Not considered a close contact of Biden" is funnier than it should be.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 26, 2022, 03:06:35 PM
Not entirely certain I understand everything here but it seems like this might be a significant snag in FL's plan to rescind RCID.

https://twitter.com/rumpfshaker/status/1518999915053080577?t=lwf_mrjAlCLXDDJSJMqErA&s=19 (https://twitter.com/rumpfshaker/status/1518999915053080577?t=lwf_mrjAlCLXDDJSJMqErA&s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 26, 2022, 10:57:23 PM
https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/lawmakers-strike-word-marijuana-all-state-laws-calling-term-racist/MJOQZ7OCK5CUDLBA2H53CYOJXE/

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/17/Marijuana_plant.jpg/180px-Marijuana_plant.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 27, 2022, 10:17:58 AM
https://twitter.com/JasonSCampbell/status/1519295439278907392?t=Hy8jdnIJp6P6OHVRRZIBrQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on April 27, 2022, 11:47:49 AM
(https://preview.redd.it/d8pgdp3z33w81.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=c380a1363910cdd219900d96d105e62db200667f)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 27, 2022, 12:04:31 PM
Elon will ride to the rescue.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 27, 2022, 03:34:47 PM
The student loan cancellation buzz is like a bat signal going up to bring all the shittiest people out of the woodwork to oppose it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 27, 2022, 04:34:09 PM
If I'm reading the info correctly it looks like the Utah Dems are backing Evan McMullin instead of nominating their own candidate to oppose Mike Lee, in an "anyone but the current guy" move.

Unrelated, Marjie busting out this old gem:

https://twitter.com/MeidasTouch/status/1519426271918186504?t=SEzH0TzTXKKikwFffgKKng&s=19 (https://twitter.com/MeidasTouch/status/1519426271918186504?t=SEzH0TzTXKKikwFffgKKng&s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 27, 2022, 09:06:18 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6a/Harvard_Steam_-_manhole_cover_-_Harvard_University_-_Cambridge%2C_MA_-_DSC02546.jpg/244px-Harvard_Steam_-_manhole_cover_-_Harvard_University_-_Cambridge%2C_MA_-_DSC02546.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/03/Bat_signal.jpg/240px-Bat_signal.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/56/Steamfitter_MET_DP164571.jpg/190px-Steamfitter_MET_DP164571.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 28, 2022, 11:26:54 AM
The student loan cancellation buzz is like a bat signal going up to bring all the shittiest people out of the woodwork to oppose it
https://twitter.com/SenMikeLee/status/1519388083732594689?t=d6BLqDPteic_NS416V2iKg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 28, 2022, 12:32:29 PM
https://twitter.com/SenMikeLee/status/1519388083732594689?t=d6BLqDPteic_NS416V2iKg&s=19
Lee completely missed the forest for the trees with his cynical, playing-to-the-crowd 'patronage' angle.  Many layers to this onion beginning with guaranteed loans giving in$titution$ the incentive to jack up tuition that outpaces inflation and the "racket" that's resulted from it.  For the percentage of those that take out a loan but do not complete their degree, they are doubly behind the 8-ball given their reduced earning power.   A slew of different angles to look at, e.g. (just spitballing), money back guarantees relative to earning power actualized vs. student debt accrued? 

 My point is, putting someone behind the 8-ball in perpetuity's obviously the last thing higher learning should seek to accomplish yet at the same time, the non-college working stiff who balks at the idea of paying for someone else's debt should not be dismissed as the 'shittiest segments' of society.  There's a solution in between the current (and simplistic) all-or-nothing argument....beginning with tuition at the institutional end and the usury-like burdens placed on loanees.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 28, 2022, 12:37:59 PM
My point is, putting someone behind the 8-ball in perpetuity's obviously the last thing higher learning should seek to accomplish yet at the same time, the non-college working stiff who balks at the idea of paying for someone else's debt should not be dismissed as the 'shittiest segments' of society.  There's a solution in between the current (and simplistic) all-or-nothing argument....beginning with tuition at the institutional end and the usury-like burdens placed on loanees.

Pundits and politicians against it are shitty. Working class people against it are merely ignorant.

Nobody is suggesting debt cancellation as the only thing that needs to happen, but it's pretty much the only thing that can be done with a useless legislature. And there's no good reason not to do it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 28, 2022, 04:04:00 PM
Lol, yeah no.

Working stiffs or people who paid their way through college shouldn't have to subsidize some losers useless degree.

A loan was taken out. Pay it back.

There absolutely is a cogent and righteous argument to be made on students being charged a juice rate that would make a loanshark blush, but outright cancellation is the most hamfisted solution possible (not to mention doesn't address the further issue of college tuition being out of control because colleges run their schools like drunken sailors).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 28, 2022, 05:03:06 PM
Lol, yeah no.

Working stiffs or people who paid their way through college shouldn't have to subsidize some losers useless degree.

A loan was taken out. Pay it back.

There absolutely is a cogent and righteous argument to be made on students being charged a juice rate that would make a loanshark blush, but outright cancellation is the most hamfisted solution possible (not to mention doesn't address the further issue of college tuition being out of control because colleges run their schools like drunken sailors).

I'm a working stiff. I never went to university and I have paid a freak ton of tax over the years because I got lucky in my career, and I'm all in on student loan forgiveness (this isn't just a US issue). I will happily see my taxes go to ensure that kids coming out of university today do so unencumbered by the cost of their education.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on April 28, 2022, 05:24:28 PM
I'm a working stiff. I never went to university and I have paid a freak ton of tax over the years because I got lucky in my career, and I'm all in on student loan forgiveness (this isn't just a US issue). I will happily see my taxes go to ensure that kids coming out of university today do so unencumbered by the cost of their education.

That's because you're an empathetic grown-up who actually cares about his fellow citizens, young people, and the future well-being of his country and humanity in general.
But JE, have you even considered HoW wIlL wE pAy 4 IITTT?? Let's pretend that's a real issue when it comes to things our particular propagandists tell us not to really care about.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on April 28, 2022, 05:30:06 PM
Just get Elon Musk to pay for all the student debt.  Problem solved.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 28, 2022, 05:32:53 PM


Working class people against it are merely ignorant.

For emphasis
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 28, 2022, 05:33:15 PM
I'm a working stiff. I never went to university and I have paid a freak ton of tax over the years because I got lucky in my career, and I'm all in on student loan forgiveness (this isn't just a US issue). I will happily see my taxes go to ensure that kids coming out of university today do so unencumbered by the cost of their education.

It's draft night, so I don't particularly want to go into cranky debate mode.

But how would one say that student loans should get bailed out by the government.

When things like social security, and pension funds aren't getting bailed out? Or even Medicare for all?

To me all of those sound like far more righteous entitlement causes than to subsidize kids loans. And the response of "Well I think we should do all of them" is just nonsense. Sure you may mean it, but the reality is the government doesn't do everything at once nor prioritize everything equally.

I think the student loan bailout thing just earns far more political points and lifetime followers than making people whole who completely got fucked by pensions they worked all their lives for
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 28, 2022, 05:43:33 PM
But how would one say that student loans should get bailed out by the government.

You're looking at it wrong. It's not "bailing out", it's fixing a wrong that shouldn't have happened in the first place.

Don't look at it as how many kids went through school and are now drowning in debt as a result, look at it as how many kids could have gone to school and done so much more with their lives but didn't because they were terrified of drowning in debt. Think of how much unfulfilled potential exists. We can't fix that now, but we can fix the ones still struggling and send the message to the next generation that they can be the best version of themselves without fear of being crippled for life.

It's draft night, so I don't particularly want to go into cranky debate mode.

You're right, let's get back to making young men overnight millionaires for their ability to catch and throw footballs. Go ahead and draw your own lines there.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 28, 2022, 05:51:01 PM
You're looking at it wrong. It's not "bailing out", it's fixing a wrong that shouldn't have happened in the first place.

Don't look at it as how many kids went through school and are now drowning in debt as a result, look at it as how many kids could have gone to school and done so much more with their lives but didn't because they were terrified of drowning in debt. Think of how much unfulfilled potential exists. We can't fix that now, but we can fix the ones still struggling and send the message to the next generation that they can be the best version of themselves without fear of being crippled for life.

You're right, let's get back to making young men overnight millionaires for their ability to catch and throw footballs. Go ahead and draw your own lines there.

I guess I wasn't really trying to debate whether or not student loans should get subsidized or whatever you want to call it. Because I don't want to go into a right leaning ideology vs left leaning ideology debate

My question was how do you prioritize this vs other major (and in my opinion more important) entitlement spending?

I think like 50% of Americans 65 and over have less than 10,000 saved for retirement.

People who worked all their lives for pensions that now have no money, and won't get excrement they've worked 20 30 40 years for.

Healthcare is obvious

There was the previous mortgage crisis and presumably a new one about to loom with all the housing debt related to covid.

Is student loans a bigger priority than all of them?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 28, 2022, 06:08:20 PM
And in addition to my above question. If the concern is wasted potential and people not wanting to go to college because of predatory loans.

Why not just focus on making two year community college free for all Americans? Politically this is much more feasible to do, and this will focus on the future rather than the past. Plus this would encourage more people to go to school and unlock some of their potential.

To me, the impression I get that is that this is more about the left jerking off their constituents rather than helping people out.

I'm not saying that student loan forgiveness wouldn't help people, but it doesn't seem to be nearly as helpful as many other potential entitlements.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on April 28, 2022, 06:26:37 PM
Student loan forgiveness helps a generation of current adults to contribute to the economy in ways that have been inaccessible based on their debt load. It helps to build the middle class in a real, tangible way, specifically targeting adults who come from families with relatively less capital. Coming from someone who worked every semester of college and graduated with no debt, it is a relatively quick thing the government can do to help improve people's lives and will allow for more economic risk taking and consumer spending.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 29, 2022, 05:38:11 PM
https://twitter.com/wiczipedia/status/1362153807879303171 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 29, 2022, 08:04:43 PM
Coal millionaire hates idea of EV tax credits

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/04/west-virginas-manchin-stands-in-way-of-ludicrous-ev-tax-credits/ (https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/04/west-virginas-manchin-stands-in-way-of-ludicrous-ev-tax-credits/)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 30, 2022, 07:31:26 AM
Coal millionaire hates idea of EV tax credits

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/04/west-virginas-manchin-stands-in-way-of-ludicrous-ev-tax-credits/ (https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/04/west-virginas-manchin-stands-in-way-of-ludicrous-ev-tax-credits/)

I always find it questionable or even exaggerated. When people just assume this elderly rich dude is making these decisions or views because of his personal business.

There's obviously conflict in interest, but I somehow doubt a year whose nearly 80 worth 10 million is doing this out of greed.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on April 30, 2022, 09:11:57 AM
K
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on April 30, 2022, 09:22:12 AM
Coal millionaire hates idea of EV tax credits

https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/04/west-virginas-manchin-stands-in-way-of-ludicrous-ev-tax-credits/ (https://arstechnica.com/cars/2022/04/west-virginas-manchin-stands-in-way-of-ludicrous-ev-tax-credits/)

Why does no one ask him directly if his huge financial ties to the coal industry are influencing his refusal to help phase out that industry because of the massive pollution that comes along with it?  I guess if they did, he'd just say it was in the best interest of his constituents who stand to benefit from it.

He's not wrong about the EV credits in the current situation, being that it doesn't make sense to subsidize an EV car when the demand is already through the roof.  It won't always be this way though, once they are able to ramp up supply.  I don't have a problem with the EV credits, but I think they should be a little smaller and not phase out for certain cars once they sell a certain #.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 01, 2022, 02:12:17 PM
He's not wrong about the EV credits in the current situation, being that it doesn't make sense to subsidize an EV car when the demand is already through the roof. It won't always be this way though, once they are able to ramp up supply.  I don't have a problem with the EV credits, but I think they should be a little smaller and not phase out for certain cars once they sell a certain #.
The 'demand' issue's a fair point.  Back in the 90's fledgling green industries were given preferential allowances, e.g. the federal government in their procurement practices required purchased paper to contain a certain minimum percentage of recycled content.  Locally this came in the form of 'premium price' allowances above the current market price for items that contained a certain percentage content of either post-industrial and/or post-consumer content.  In short help the green baby to crawl up until it can walk on its own.

As to providing student loan relief, all well and good but in the haste to demand "total & absolute relief now!" some underlying causes keep getting ignored: the tuition hikes that outpaced inflation on the institutional end and the usury rates that loanees are unfairly subjected to.  Reduce the tuition hikes ('now!') that institutions used guaranteed loans to take advantage of.  As for the loans themselves, restructure them so that loanees are not buried under them ad infinitum. Fix the SYSTEM.  Or...fvck it....make college tuition-free...the institutional sector will love that since they'll continue getting their bloated tuition dollars - why should they care where it comes from?   Gov't for all the people?   

         'look for the union label..'
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/1a/Union_Labor_Campaign_Poster_1888.jpg/320px-Union_Labor_Campaign_Poster_1888.jpg)


"Eh Bluey, who ARRRE these people?...do we know them?"
 "Pay them no mind dear.....they're merely ignorant."
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ce/Helen_Elna_Hokinson_-_New_Yorker_cover_-_December_1940.jpg/346px-Helen_Elna_Hokinson_-_New_Yorker_cover_-_December_1940.jpg)
Quote
smh....for emphasis

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 01, 2022, 04:07:39 PM
Why does no one ask him directly if his huge financial ties to the coal industry are influencing his refusal to help phase out that industry because of the massive pollution that comes along with it?  I guess if they did, he'd just say it was in the best interest of his constituents who stand to benefit from it.

He's not wrong about the EV credits in the current situation, being that it doesn't make sense to subsidize an EV car when the demand is already through the roof.  It won't always be this way though, once they are able to ramp up supply.  I don't have a problem with the EV credits, but I think they should be a little smaller and not phase out for certain cars once they sell a certain #.

The guy has opposed every green policy that's been put forth. You don't need to dig too deep to figure this one out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 01, 2022, 04:31:53 PM
The guy has opposed every green policy that's been put forth. You don't need to dig too deep to figure this one out.
But it would be worth it for someone to make him answer the direct question.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 01, 2022, 04:41:00 PM
But it would be worth it for someone to make him answer the direct question.

Only if you think he would give a direct answer rather than threaten someone for asking the question.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 01, 2022, 05:56:16 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Charcoal_briquettes_in_bags.jpg/174px-Charcoal_briquettes_in_bags.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b3/Starting_the_charcoal.jpg/306px-Starting_the_charcoal.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/78/Coal_Burning.jpg/169px-Coal_Burning.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/5a/Hotdogs_%285603654466%29.jpg/320px-Hotdogs_%285603654466%29.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/Burgers_and_hot_dogs.JPG/320px-Burgers_and_hot_dogs.JPG)

NYC dirty water dogs
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/52/2008.06.07.173702_Abington_Sq._NYC.jpg/320px-2008.06.07.173702_Abington_Sq._NYC.jpg)

Chicago stupid overkill
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/2a/Chicago_dog_%282377079837%29.jpg)

Irish weiners
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/61/Pigs_in_blanket_-_Hillshire_Farm_Lit%27l_Smokies.jpg/320px-Pigs_in_blanket_-_Hillshire_Farm_Lit%27l_Smokies.jpg)

Shaq dogg
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/22/IKEA_の忍者ドッグ_2016_%2829475839311%29.jpg/240px-IKEA_の忍者ドッグ_2016_%2829475839311%29.jpg)

'Not funny scumbag..this is serious"
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8a/Greta_Thunberg%2C_2018_%28cropped%29.jpg/170px-Greta_Thunberg%2C_2018_%28cropped%29.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6f/Greta_Thunberg_02_cropped.jpg/206px-Greta_Thunberg_02_cropped.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 02, 2022, 07:56:01 PM
lol, lmao

https://twitter.com/zackstanton/status/1521287480347086849?t=UDiBLXANuvUTGvTMxO5rbA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 02, 2022, 07:57:11 PM
https://twitter.com/wiczipedia/status/1362153807879303171
She's a goddamn weirdo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 02, 2022, 08:17:41 PM
lol, lmao

https://twitter.com/zackstanton/status/1521287480347086849?t=UDiBLXANuvUTGvTMxO5rbA&s=19

You are a bunch of backwards fucks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: guinness77 on May 02, 2022, 08:30:16 PM
This country is fucked.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on May 02, 2022, 08:32:29 PM
lol, lmao

https://twitter.com/zackstanton/status/1521287480347086849?t=UDiBLXANuvUTGvTMxO5rbA&s=19
Yikes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 02, 2022, 08:35:13 PM
Generally I'm supportive of giving power/rights to the state over the fed, and if that's the argument here that makes this slightly less appalling.

But this shits just freaking not appropriate for this era in time.

Not to mention I don't really get the logic of defining (abortion as) murder being a state issue.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 02, 2022, 08:36:49 PM
From a political standpoint this is a moronic move by conservatives.

The left was going to get their poopchute tore open in the midterm elections, and now you just handed them a nuclear warhead.

Not to mention you just gave the left (what they'd call) justification to destroy the Supreme Court by diluting it.

Really an idiotic thing from the right
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 02, 2022, 08:41:10 PM
Barricades are apparently up around the Supreme Court building.  Tomorrow should be fun.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 02, 2022, 08:44:39 PM
Barricades are apparently up around the Supreme Court building.  Tomorrow should be fun.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 02, 2022, 08:48:56 PM
Reminder that there are 0 out of 50 states where an abortion ban has majority support and yet here we are.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 02, 2022, 08:49:14 PM
Barricades are apparently up around the Supreme Court building.  Tomorrow should be fun.

So if rioters raid the Supreme Court tomorrow in the name of abortion will it be hailed as bad as 9/11 etc etc?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 02, 2022, 08:50:42 PM
So if rioters raid the Supreme Court tomorrow in the name of abortion will it be hailed as bad as 9/11 etc etc?

As they won't be a majority of white bald men with goatees, knock off Oakleys and Wal-Mart tactical gear, they'll presumably be met by the National Guard and tear gas.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 02, 2022, 08:52:51 PM
So if rioters raid the Supreme Court tomorrow in the name of abortion will it be hailed as bad as 9/11 etc etc?

You know the answer to that. InSuReCKsHuN histrionics are the worst.

As they won't be a majority of white bald men with goatees, knock off Oakleys and Wal-Mart tactical gear, they'll presumably be met by the National Guard and tear gas.

It's amazing that this is still the narrative considering an unarmed protester was murdered.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 02, 2022, 08:53:15 PM
As they won't be a majority of white bald men with goatees, knock off Oakleys and Wal-Mart tactical gear, they'll presumably be met by the National Guard and tear gas.

Maybe you forgot whose in charge

If anything they'll be handed out checks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 02, 2022, 08:53:57 PM
You know the answer to that. InSuReCKsHuN histrionics are the worst.

It's amazing that this is still the narrative considering an unarmed protester was murdered.

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 02, 2022, 08:57:36 PM
You know the answer to that. InSuReCKsHuN histrionics are the worst.

It's amazing that this is still the narrative considering an unarmed protester was murdered.
She's not dead, Lin Wood said so.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 02, 2022, 09:05:39 PM
She's not dead, Lin Wood said so.
Q said she and JFK are coming back on 6/9/22
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 02, 2022, 09:06:33 PM
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.politico.com/news/2022/05/02/supreme-court-draft-opinion-00029475%3f_amp=true

Don't know what to take away from this, but apparently a supreme court draft leaking like this is something that rarely (never?) occurs.

freak if I know what to make of it, but I imagine there's a possibility that shenanigans are at play here
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 02, 2022, 09:29:06 PM
Quote
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
The alleged leak of the opinion in Dobbs v. Jackson Women’s Health Organization is nothing short of breathtaking. It would constitute one of the greatest breaches of security in the history of the Court
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 02, 2022, 09:31:06 PM
LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

She's not dead, Lin Wood said so.

Q said she and JFK are coming back on 6/9/22

Non responses and dumb quips aside from the same people who recoiled in horror when (probably fake news but w/e I'll indulge) Trump wanted to go the MB route and shoot people in the leg, an unarmed protester was shot and killed.



Without a doubt. And it's obvious why it was leaked. That's ok, I'm sure things are about to get "mostly peaceful"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 02, 2022, 09:32:33 PM
It's also worth noting this draft was from February
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 02, 2022, 09:40:47 PM
Dollar to a stale doughnut Roberts isn't voting for it.   4-4, dead in the water

G'nite

 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on May 02, 2022, 09:46:32 PM
theyre hoping for riots so they can point to this when people bring up 1/6



in other news, super glad my family and myself dont live in that dystopian pooper to the south.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on May 02, 2022, 09:49:26 PM
i should start an abortion destination travel agency...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 02, 2022, 09:54:44 PM
theyre hoping for riots so they can point to this when people bring up 1/6



in other news, super glad my family and myself dont live in that dystopian pooper to the south.

I somehow doubt the leak came from the right
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 02, 2022, 10:01:58 PM
Dollar to a stale doughnut Roberts isn't voting for it.   4-4, dead in the water

G'nite
Huh?  They have 6.  He doesn't matter.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 02, 2022, 11:03:23 PM
theyre hoping for riots so they can point to this when people bring up 1/6

LOL JFC. Yeah, it was a clerk for either Alito or one of the concurring judges that leaked this. You must've been at the top of your class.

Besides, the right doesn't need a..comparitive riot I guess? The summer of 2020 happened, city blocks went up in flames, the same people that supported that under w/e idiotic premise they landed on already treat "1/6" like 9/11 and get rightfully laughed at as total hypocrites.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 02, 2022, 11:04:17 PM
Once again, the party of less government and freedumb can't wait to enforce more and take away rights from the people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 02, 2022, 11:06:13 PM
Ban sports betting and online poker, people will still do it. Just more dangerously, on websites that are sketchy and could steal your money at any time.

Ban drugs, people will still use drugs. Just more dangerously.

Ban abortion, and women will still get it. Just more dangerously.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 02, 2022, 11:06:41 PM
i should start an abortion destination travel agency...
Nevada abortion clinics are about to have surge pricing from all the Arizona and Utah women driving up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 02, 2022, 11:20:42 PM
Ban sports betting and online poker, people will still do it. Just more dangerously, on websites that are sketchy and could steal your money at any time.

Ban drugs, people will still use drugs. Just more dangerously.

Ban abortion, and women will still get it. Just more dangerously.

I'm pro legalized abortion, but the abortion rate would drop tremendously if abortion became illegal.

The one good thing would be people would likely take birth control and or safe sex more seriously.

But the bad would far outweigh it.

In this case you'd have people just crossing state lines to do it, which would make this entire freaking thing absolutely retarded. This would also make it extremely hard for the poorest of people to have an abortion since I'd imagine traveling x hours away for a freaking medical procedure isn't exactly feasible for many
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 02, 2022, 11:22:02 PM
Nevada abortion clinics are about to have surge pricing from all the Arizona and Utah women driving up.

I'd assume this is in jest. But I'd imagine your average person getting an abortion is broke as freak. Hell most likely can't even make the cross state trek
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 02, 2022, 11:24:11 PM
I'd assume this is in jest. But I'd imagine your average person getting an abortion is broke as freak. Hell most likely can't even make the cross state trek
I wouldn't say your average person getting an abortion is broke. That seems completely made up. However, the rich people who want abortions will still get them. All this does is harm the poor people who want to get abortions who now can't.

(and yes, surge pricing was a joke)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 02, 2022, 11:26:10 PM
I'm pro legalized abortion, but the abortion rate would drop tremendously if abortion became illegal.

The one good thing would be people would likely take birth control and or safe sex more seriously.

But the bad would far outweigh it.
Women will get abortion with or without the law. You really think people are going to have safer sex because of this? That isn't reality. Nobody is thinking about that when they're about to get laid (and that's best case scenario....rapists certainly aren't going to consider that).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 02, 2022, 11:40:17 PM
I'll never forgive Lautenberg for stumping for Alito. Piece of excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 02, 2022, 11:54:57 PM
Women will get abortion with or without the law. You really think people are going to have safer sex because of this? That isn't reality. Nobody is thinking about that when they're about to get laid (and that's best case scenario....rapists certainly aren't going to consider that).

There's plenty of data suggesting that something like 99% of abortions aren't because of rape.

And yes I imagine that if you live in a state where abortion is illegal you will take different precautions.

Regardless I think the abortion needs to remain legal
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 02, 2022, 11:57:59 PM
I wouldn't say your average person getting an abortion is broke. That seems completely made up. However, the rich people who want abortions will still get them. All this does is harm the poor people who want to get abortions who now can't.

(and yes, surge pricing was a joke)

You may believe it's made up. But it's not.

Quote
Low-income women are more than five times as likely than affluent women to experience an unintended pregnancy

Quote
75% of women requesting abortion in the US are in poverty or in the low income bracket(7). The poorest 12% of women account for almost 50% of abortions and the poorest 30% for 75% of abortions(
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 03, 2022, 12:20:50 AM
 https://twitter.com/osinttechnical/status/1521329047552282633?s=21&t=dO85XeLeUIzD3mLKUm7iQQ (https://twitter.com/osinttechnical/status/1521329047552282633?s=21&t=dO85XeLeUIzD3mLKUm7iQQ)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 03, 2022, 12:25:25 AM
You may believe it's made up. But it's not.

I haven't looked, but if it is, it's likely because they have less access to education, birth control, and other things along those lines.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 03, 2022, 12:25:38 AM
https://twitter.com/osinttechnical/status/1521329047552282633?s=21&t=dO85XeLeUIzD3mLKUm7iQQ (https://twitter.com/osinttechnical/status/1521329047552282633?s=21&t=dO85XeLeUIzD3mLKUm7iQQ)

So brave

Someone should forgive all their student loans
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 03, 2022, 12:26:42 AM
I haven't looked, but if it is, it's likely because they have less access to education, birth control, and other things along those lines.

Im sure that is the reason.

In this case I'm not attacking the lower class, I'm actually saying they're the ones who could get fucked the hardest by this.

And all of society would pay the cost
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 03, 2022, 12:34:02 AM
This bodes not well.

https://twitter.com/mjs_dc/status/1521296185977417732?s=21&t=dO85XeLeUIzD3mLKUm7iQQ (https://twitter.com/mjs_dc/status/1521296185977417732?s=21&t=dO85XeLeUIzD3mLKUm7iQQ)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 03, 2022, 01:19:32 AM
If this turns out to be a real thing, this would definitely conflict my political opinion.

It's fairly obvious that I frequently side with the rights opinions versus that of the left. But this would be pretty freaking atrocious and something I thought was always just some left wing boogiemen nonsense to drum up support from donors and get people to show up to the polls.

For a party that prided itself on less regulation, to me, this sounds like a huge step in government overreach and big regulation.

I had hoped that Trumps nomination and subsequent presidency would have brought a less religious segment of the right to power (among the right). But this would prove that to not be the case.

I think the right was "probably" winning the culture war on big issues like CRT, crime, and policing (not necessarily dominating but they held the popular opinion). And this would absolutely cripple the right in unprecedented ways, and I do believe this cluster freak ends up moving the entire country way to the left

I guess this is what happens when all the decision makers in your party are complete freaking dinosaurs

(they are all dinosaurs on the left too, but their most vocal constituents are kiddos)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 03, 2022, 01:23:48 AM
CRT isn't a big issue, it was a manufactured issue from the right to drum up support.

But yes, this is a massive government overreach. The GOP long ago abandoned its core principles, and this is another example. It seems their core principles now are just finding ways to pee off the left.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 03, 2022, 01:26:50 AM
CRT isn't a big issue, it was a manufactured issue from the right to drum up support.

But yes, this is a massive government overreach. The GOP long ago abandoned its core principles, and this is another example.

I don't think CRT is a big issue in that it didn't mean or impact excrement. Sure I don't agree with the idea of teaching it to kids but let's be honest most kids don't pay attention or give a freak about anything they learn in school. And on a scale of 1-10 the importance of it to me as an issue is easily a 1

But I do think it is a big issue in the sense that it brought up an issue of parents having a say in what their kids are taught in school, and how many felt like they were told to freak off (and subsequently how this riled them to show up for elections and what not as previously seen in Virginia) . And I think that played a much bigger factor
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on May 03, 2022, 02:13:08 AM
There's plenty of data suggesting that something like 99% of abortions aren't because of rape.

And yes I imagine that if you live in a state where abortion is illegal you will take different precautions.

Regardless I think the abortion needs to remain legal

Comprehensive sex education is coincidentally also being hit hard. State GOP party in Maine at least officially has adopted the banning of sex education in almost all capacities in public schools as part of their official platform. I assume it's not the only state with a similar platform.

Also, counties with abortion restrictions tend to have higher rates of unintended pregnancy, because (probably) they typically align with lower sex education and access to safe sex:

Quote
Using World Bank income groups, we found an inverse relationship between unintended pregnancy and income, whereas abortion rates varied non-monotonically across groups. In countries where abortion was restricted, the proportion of unintended pregnancies ending in abortion had increased compared with the proportion for 1990–94, and the unintended pregnancy rates were higher than in countries where abortion was broadly legal.

https://www.guttmacher.org/article/2020/07/unintended-pregnancy-and-abortion-income-region-and-legal-status-abortion-estimates
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 03, 2022, 07:14:31 AM
CRT isn't a big issue, it was a manufactured issue from the right to drum up support.

LOl ok Joy Reid.

I won’t even get into the absurdity of his kicking an issue back to the States is “massive government overreach.”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 03, 2022, 07:25:22 AM
Dollar to a stale doughnut Roberts isn't voting for it.   4-4, dead in the water

G'nite
Alito, Thomas, ACB, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch - who do you have dissenting?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 03, 2022, 07:26:43 AM
Don't worry guys, Dem leadership is on the case

https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1521381786411933696?t=DhdvmjO20AJaALmlpinTvw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 03, 2022, 09:35:06 AM
That's certainly a reaction

https://twitter.com/borgposting/status/1521489991486087179?t=Hp1RP_DzDcOc30u5yfJWGQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 03, 2022, 09:52:29 AM
SCOTUS upset someone violated their right to make decisions in private.

https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/1521298708180226062 (https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/1521298708180226062)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on May 03, 2022, 10:44:10 AM
LOL JFC. Yeah, it was a clerk for either Alito or one of the concurring judges that leaked this. You must've been at the top of your class.

Besides, the right doesn't need a..comparitive riot I guess? The summer of 2020 happened, city blocks went up in flames, the same people that supported that under w/e idiotic premise they landed on already treat "1/6" like 9/11 and get rightfully laughed at as total hypocrites.

i never said they leaked it, all im saying is this is a nice big distraction that just so happens to be coming out at an opportune time.

the right would relish a riot over this, you yourself would be clamoring to "what about the abortion riots" everytime someone brought up the insurrection. you know it, i know it, we all know it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 03, 2022, 10:47:00 AM
Seeing some theories that this was leaked intentionally to allow the response to ease out by the time the draft was finalized and released. Not sure how much I believe that they would actually do that or if it would have the desired effect of allowing the crowds to cool off but there it is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 03, 2022, 10:48:33 AM
i never said they leaked it, all im saying is this is a nice big distraction that just so happens to be coming out at an opportune time.

the right would relish a riot over this, you yourself would be clamoring to "what about the abortion riots" everytime someone brought up the insurrection. you know it, i know it, we all know it.

I see this as more likely to be a vagina hat protest than a full-on riot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 03, 2022, 10:58:38 AM


I'm pro legalized abortion, but the abortion rate would drop tremendously if abortion became illegal.

The one good thing would be people would likely take birth control and or safe sex more seriously.

But the bad would far outweigh it.

In this case you'd have people just crossing state lines to do it, which would make this entire freaking thing absolutely retarded. This would also make it extremely hard for the poorest of people to have an abortion since I'd imagine traveling x hours away for a freaking medical procedure isn't exactly feasible for many

Abortion rate has been declining over the past 40 years, likely due to better sex ed and access to birth control. Safest way to continue to drop that number is pursuing and expanding those efforts.

(https://i.redd.it/c4ivf5v6a9x81.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 03, 2022, 11:31:25 AM
i never said they leaked it, all im saying is this is a nice big distraction that just so happens to be coming out at an opportune time.

the right would relish a riot over this, you yourself would be clamoring to "what about the abortion riots" everytime someone brought up the insurrection. you know it, i know it, we all know it.

Again, I don't need to play the whatabout game considering the summer of 2020.

But in terms of this being a nice big distraction, yes it is. It's a GREAT distraction from the utter failure that has been the Biden/Harris administration and Democratic governance. This leak couldn't be coming out at a better time for the left. What should have been an easy path to an absolute bloodbath in the midterms and a great day for the GOP just got a whole hell of a lot more murkier.

SCOTUS upset someone violated their right to make decisions in private.

https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/1521298708180226062 (https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/1521298708180226062)

BuT wHaT aBoUt DeMoCrAtIc NoRmS.

You don't care about them, you never did.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on May 03, 2022, 11:44:15 AM
utter failure that has been the Biden/Harris administration and Democratic governance.

ive been gone a long time, i cant recall the last time i agreed with you.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 03, 2022, 11:59:09 AM
(https://i.redd.it/p2nq6j75q8x81.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on May 03, 2022, 01:02:36 PM
(https://i.redd.it/p2nq6j75q8x81.jpg)

Universal paid parental leave, pre-k, and health care would be incredible in terms of increasing the quality of life and health outcomes of parents, newborns, and children. It would reduce the economic and personal costs associated with pregnancy, and ultimately reduce the demand for abortions. If only it weren't so Marxist.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 03, 2022, 02:04:45 PM
SCOTUS upset someone violated their right to make decisions in private.

https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/1521298708180226062 (https://twitter.com/brianstelter/status/1521298708180226062)

You're delusional if you don't think this is a big deal.

First off yes I think then stripping abortion rights is reprehensible.

But this left wing idea of if people make decisions we don't like we should threaten to bear them to death and intimidate them is absolutely disgusting too.

This sequence of events will likely have significant consequences on the Supreme Court going forward and not in a good way.

Just because the Supreme Court made a bad decision doesn't mean more bad behavior and decisions are warranted
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 03, 2022, 02:11:35 PM
You're delusional if you don't think this is a big deal.

First off yes I think then stripping abortion rights is reprehensible.

But this left wing idea of if people make decisions we don't like we should threaten to bear them to death and intimidate them is absolutely disgusting too.

This sequence of events will likely have significant consequences on the Supreme Court going forward and not in a good way.

Just because the Supreme Court made a bad decision doesn't mean more bad behavior and decisions are warranted

For the love of whatever god you want to believe in, learn to read.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on May 03, 2022, 02:28:02 PM
But this left wing idea of if people make decisions we don't like we should threaten to bear them to death and intimidate them is absolutely disgusting too.

1. Threatening and intimidating based on decisions you don't like is not a left wing idea

Quote
First off yes I think then stripping abortion rights is reprehensible.

2. If it is reprehensible, and the majority (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/05/06/about-six-in-ten-americans-say-abortion-should-be-legal-in-all-or-most-cases/) of the country clearly agrees (https://s.abcnews.com/images/US/AbortionAttitudes_v01_DP_1651588181195_hpEmbed_1x1_992.jpg), but it's happening anyway (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/abortion-rights-us-restrictions-buck-global-trend-2021-2021-12-13/), what do you think should be done to stop it?

3. The point of Cato's post is that a decision that ought to be made in private is now subject to unreasonable levels of scrutiny, similar to the decision around having an abortion. The SC being upset about their privacy in decision making as it intrudes on the medical privacy and decision making of countless individuals is ironic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 03, 2022, 02:40:15 PM
3. The point of Cato's post is that a decision that ought to be made in private is now subject to unreasonable levels of scrutiny, similar to the decision around having an abortion. The SC being upset about their privacy in decision making as it intrudes on the medical privacy and decision making of countless individuals is ironic.

Yes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 03, 2022, 03:31:58 PM
1. Threatening and intimidating based on decisions you don't like is not a left wing idea

2. If it is reprehensible, and the majority (https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2021/05/06/about-six-in-ten-americans-say-abortion-should-be-legal-in-all-or-most-cases/) of the country clearly agrees (https://s.abcnews.com/images/US/AbortionAttitudes_v01_DP_1651588181195_hpEmbed_1x1_992.jpg), but it's happening anyway (https://www.reuters.com/world/us/abortion-rights-us-restrictions-buck-global-trend-2021-2021-12-13/), what do you think should be done to stop it?

3. The point of Cato's post is that a decision that ought to be made in private is now subject to unreasonable levels of scrutiny, similar to the decision around having an abortion. The SC being upset about their privacy in decision making as it intrudes on the medical privacy and decision making of countless individuals is ironic.

1) yes it's true the left doesn't have a patent on it, but it has become their biggest weapon, and it unquestionably has been hijacked far more than the left than the right. I don't think this is so much an ideology concept rather a reflection of the political demographics (ie young people are far more vocal and or violent)

2) I think from a procedural standpoint the standpoint what the Supreme Court did wasn't unreasonable. From a bottom line outcome its horrendous. I think realistically abortion should've been addressed with some kind of amendment over the past 50 years as RVW was really a judicial activism stop-gap. But it was taken for granted and ignored. At this point I think the best solution would be for the left to push some kind of bandaid delaying the implementation of this chang due it being a massive change, while building public support for an amendment legalizing abortion nationally.  How feasible is this idk, but I do think you'll see a new support for the left from moderates because this is pretty freaking massive

3) the Supreme Courts ruling, while semantics, was more about the interpretation of the constitution than the legalization of abortion. Sure it's highly polarized because all the guys voting for it are likely bibliophile Republicans, but I do think the fundamental issue here is Federalism and or the constitution rather than "Should abortion be legal". And if you read Alitos opinion he does state as much. Again I understand that this issue is polarized so I see why people see it the way they do.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 03, 2022, 04:05:50 PM
A lot of blue MAGA types have taken to condemning Snowden for leaking government info, I'd like to see the mental pretzels they make on the SCOTUS leaker. For the record, they're both good.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 03, 2022, 04:10:43 PM
The US has:

-The highest maternal mortality rate among industrialized countries
-No required paid maternity leave
-No continued birth mother care
-No universal maternity care
-No subsidized child care

No one opposing abortions actually gives a excrement about the fetuses after they are born.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 03, 2022, 04:30:27 PM
The US has:

-The highest maternal mortality rate among industrialized countries
-No required paid maternity leave
-No continued birth mother care
-No universal maternity care
-No subsidized child care

No one opposing abortions actually gives a excrement about the fetuses after they are born.

There are between 600-800 maternal deaths a year in the United States with illicit substance abuse while pregnant being one of the most causitive variables.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 03, 2022, 04:35:46 PM
There are between 600-800 maternal deaths a year in the United States with illicit substance abuse while pregnant being one of the most causitive variables.

Who ordered the non-sequitur? It's ready.

Or are you trying to claim that these women deserved to die?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 03, 2022, 04:43:16 PM
Who ordered the non-sequitur? It's ready.

Or are you trying to claim that these women deserved to die?

I'm suggesting that while it's a tragedy, that in terms of raw numbers there are countless much much more important issues people should be focusing on.

The amount of annual maternal deaths in the United isn't that much higher than the amount of Americans who die from deer each year.

Hell if you wanted to improve mortality/morbidity there are probably a million things that should be a bigger priority

I'm pretty sure that more people die during having sex, this doesn't mean that we should go invest in Holter monitors being stocked next to condoms
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 03, 2022, 04:53:40 PM
And I'm not trying to suggest that maternal deaths aren't tragic, but if we became #1 in the world we'd be looking at saving something like 700 lives annually.

If our rate was comparable to some of the better EU/Canadian countries were looking at 300-400

And this is in a country of 350 million people
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 03, 2022, 05:12:21 PM
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FR3O-SLX0AMRaEs?format=jpg&name=large)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 03, 2022, 06:15:13 PM
Alito, Thomas, ACB, Kavanaugh, Gorsuch - who do you have dissenting?
B, I honestly don’t see Gorsuch going along with this and by extension Alito getting 5; instead he should ‘take five.’ 

The rest of this thread’s turned into shlt-stuffed haggis……   LGR!!!!   
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 04, 2022, 06:16:21 AM
(https://i.redd.it/u039fdajacx81.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 04, 2022, 07:24:01 AM
(https://i.redd.it/u039fdajacx81.jpg)

I don't want to be the one to defend the left

But by all accounts there's absolutely freaking nothing they can do.

Use it as a marketing tool and build public anger. Best realistic scenario is you make the Republican brand so toxic that you have the opportunity to negotiate a new ammendment.

Best case scenario would be to get a super majority and shove a new ammendment down their throats, but that's extremely improbable. Unless this has a historically insane impact on the midterms
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 04, 2022, 07:31:22 AM
Use it as a marketing tool and build public anger.

That's all they've done for the last 20ish years. Marketing and fundraising and funneling public anger into *maybe* getting elected and then doing nothing. Then they lose, blame people for not voting for them, and do it all again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 04, 2022, 08:59:41 AM
I’d bet a LOT of money that the SCOTUS leak was some self-righteous liberal SC clerk. I hope he/she gets caught and after all the hard work and achievement he/she realizes it was a major freak up!  No jail time or anything crazy but this person has a demonstrated inability to maintain confidence which is perhaps a lawyer’s highest responsibility. Makes him/her unfit to practice law in my view.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 04, 2022, 09:10:00 AM
There's a history of this with this specific case. Last time the leak source wasn't even fired. He offered his resignation to the justice he clerked for by then Chief Justice Warren Burger allowed him to stay on as a clerk.

Interesting TIL.

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/03/1096097236/roe-wade-original-ruling-leak (https://www.npr.org/2022/05/03/1096097236/roe-wade-original-ruling-leak)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 04, 2022, 09:11:13 AM
That's all they've done for the last 20ish years. Marketing and fundraising and funneling public anger into *maybe* getting elected and then doing nothing. Then they lose, blame people for not voting for them, and do it all again.


Mark Kelly text message within 12 hours of the reported leak. Like freaking clockwork.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 04, 2022, 09:24:33 AM
There's a history of this with this specific case. Last time the leak source wasn't even fired. He offered his resignation to the justice he clerked for by then Chief Justice Warren Burger allowed him to stay on as a clerk.

Interesting TIL.

https://www.npr.org/2022/05/03/1096097236/roe-wade-original-ruling-leak (https://www.npr.org/2022/05/03/1096097236/roe-wade-original-ruling-leak)
Interesting. TIL.  thx

edit: history aside, that person would still be the last person I'd consider hiring.  Confidence is sacrosanct. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 04, 2022, 09:51:50 AM
I’d bet a LOT of money that the SCOTUS leak was some self-righteous liberal SC clerk. I hope he/she gets caught and after all the hard work and achievement he/she realizes it was a major freak up!  No jail time or anything crazy but this person has a demonstrated inability to maintain confidence which is perhaps a lawyer’s highest responsibility. Makes him/her unfit to practice law in my view.
Have also heard it speculated that it might have been leaked by the other side in order to leak it now to lessen the impact when it actually get announced, especially when it comes to mid-terms. But nobody knows at all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 04, 2022, 11:20:50 AM
Have also heard it speculated that it might have been leaked by the other side in order to leak it now to lessen the impact when it actually get announced, especially when it comes to mid-terms. But nobody knows at all.
You could very well be right DS although with a 70% public disapproval rate I wouldn't put my money on 'red'.  My overall point was that absent of any left/right source considerations, it was an 'officer of the court' no-no.  A lawyer never--never--compromises 'in confidence'.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 04, 2022, 11:36:32 AM
I mean, I can't even believe this is a debate. This was unquestionably leaked in order to put public pressure onto what is supposed to be an independent judiciary. It was an appeal to the mob. You'd have to be really lacking in any sort of common sense to think otherwise.

As a former law clerk at a much much much much much lower level obviously, I could never imagine betraying my Judge's trust like this no matter how much I disagreed with what he was doing. Granted, my Judge also treated me better than any other boss I'll ever have. But still.

As del said, if you're capable of doing this, you're capable of totally taking a excrement on attorney-client confidentiality. To me, it's absolutely disqualifying in terms of practicing.

Then again, to my knowledge, Collinford Mattis has yet to be disbarred for throwing a freaking molotov at a cop car, so who knows. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 04, 2022, 11:52:27 AM
You could very well be right DS although with a 70% public disapproval rate I wouldn't put my money on 'red'.  My overall point was that absent of any left/right source considerations, it was an 'officer of the court' no-no.  A lawyer never--never--compromises 'in confidence'.
I agree that that's the most likely scenario, but both sides have motivation to leak it.

Of course, the most important part is the consequences of "settled law" being overturned, not that someone leaked the document. The leak is part of the story, but not the main story.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 04, 2022, 01:15:01 PM
Looks like Zuul and Vinz Clortho are preping SCOTUS for the coming of Gozer.

https://twitter.com/dildinewtop/status/1521900222410014720?s=21&t=vyq5au7xBwzXlHnW2BjB-w (https://twitter.com/dildinewtop/status/1521900222410014720?s=21&t=vyq5au7xBwzXlHnW2BjB-w)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 04, 2022, 06:32:57 PM
LFG

https://twitter.com/CawthornforNC/status/1521994807526281218?t=UmnfnlUlkLuh-dA-RuL84Q&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 04, 2022, 07:45:40 PM
LFG

https://twitter.com/CawthornforNC/status/1521994807526281218?t=UmnfnlUlkLuh-dA-RuL84Q&s=19
Wtf was that?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 04, 2022, 07:47:23 PM
Wtf was that?
Did you see the video?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 04, 2022, 08:04:38 PM
Did you see the video?

Please don't post a link to it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 04, 2022, 08:35:03 PM
He says he's not backing down. Good for him, why should he? It's OK to be gay or bi.

There are a lot of much better reasons why that queynte shouldn't be in any kind of position of power than he likes having naked fun times with his buds.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 04, 2022, 08:49:28 PM
He says he's not backing down. Good for him, why should he? It's OK to be gay or bi.

There are a lot of much better reasons why that queynte shouldn't be in any kind of position of power than he likes having naked fun times with his buds.

Just because there's nothing wrong with it doesn't mean that I want to see it.

This is very damaging for someone who runs on his particular platform.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 04, 2022, 08:56:54 PM
Just because there's nothing wrong with it doesn't mean that I want to see it.

This is very damaging for someone who runs on his particular platform.

Yes of course it is. Because his platform is toxic bullshit.

The problem is not the video, it's that the video is a problem for the people who put him there.

(https://media2.giphy.com/media/1267Co3vPNBqQU/giphy.gif?cid=ecf05e47nni4nfed93ek7gyp1k8k1dxregp6i8cp6cce1tiu&rid=giphy.gif&ct=g)

Also, there's absolutely nothing wrong with the video. It's completely harmless and seemingly innocuous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 05, 2022, 06:55:28 AM
I subscribe to the theory that this is internal GOP sabotage, they want to get rid of a liability.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 05, 2022, 07:00:11 AM
I still don't know what the freak was going on in that video.  Was he drunk?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 05, 2022, 07:04:46 AM
Don't know enough about the dude.

But it sounds like he has quite a record of sexual assault accusations. Plus a laundry list of other off excrement including including Washington insiders of trying to give him cocsine and bring him to orgies.

Maybe the gay card is why it's a big issue. But I think it's bigger picture
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 05, 2022, 08:56:50 AM
The waist high barricades around SCOTUS have been replaced with tall fencing. Wouldn't be surprised if it went up around the Capitol next.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 05, 2022, 12:02:18 PM
Running against Dr. OzClown in the PA Sen. primary

https://twitter.com/Kathy4Truth/status/1522021188129677314
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 05, 2022, 12:13:07 PM
Yeah, I'm not even a big Cawthorn fan, but unless you're a literal groomer who thinks that kids as young as 4 should be getting told about anal sex, there's nothing in his "platform" that is ToXiC. The man is literally on record supporting Obergfell.

Christ, get some better criticisms instead of the usual NPC bullshit.

Anyway, glad to see the Lincoln Project place their crosshairs on that fuckin hillbilly grifter Vance, if anything guaranteed his election, that's it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 05, 2022, 12:18:43 PM
Yeah, I'm not even a big Cawthorn fan, but unless you're a literal groomer who thinks that kids as young as 4 should be getting told about anal sex, there's nothing in his "platform" that is ToXiC. The man is literally on record supporting Obergfell.

Christ, get some better criticisms instead of the usual NPC bullshit.

Anyway, glad to see the Lincoln Project place their crosshairs on that fuckin hillbilly grifter Vance, if anything guaranteed his election, that's it.

What is the right age for kids to learn about anal sex?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 05, 2022, 12:22:42 PM
First time mom takes your temperature 'the old-fashioned way'

"Joey, this is either an exit or an entrance, or both..."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 05, 2022, 12:35:20 PM

Christ, get some better criticisms

instead of the usual NPC bullshit.

^ NPC ??

https://npcnewsonline.com

you like gladiator movies billy?

.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 05, 2022, 12:51:11 PM
^ NPC ??

https://npcnewsonline.com

you like gladiator movies billy?

.

Non Player Character. It's a videogame term co-opted mostly by 8Kun users to criticize political opponents and TikTokers who like to scream in restaurants and elevators.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 05, 2022, 12:53:38 PM
Non Player Character. It's a videogame term co-opted mostly by 8Kun users to criticize political opponents and TikTokers who like to scream in restaurants and elevators.
TIL.  thx cato
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 05, 2022, 02:03:06 PM
quote author=Johnny English link=topic=135.msg473719#msg473719 date=1651771123]
What is the right age for kids to learn about anal sex?
[/quote]

6th or 7th grade would seem to be the sweet spot considering by then I'd be shocked if a kid that age wasn't perusing the web, clicking the little box that says they're 18 and watching the latest hits from pornhub.

Rolling this into another topic, the outcry over the DoNt SaY gAy BiLl (a blatant misnomer which our *Ministry of Truth and Justice should strike off Twitter if they're so interested in combating disinformation) which was essentially an outcry over kindergartners through third graders not learning about such concepts, gay or straight, is absolutely wild to me.  Gay, straight, bi, pan, demifoxkin, etc etc etc. small children should be allowed to retain their innocence. I'd be just as outraged if a kindergarten teacher for example was discussing a woman giving a man a blowjob to their students.
 

*freak that entire concept, I can only imagine how insane people would be going if this was started under Drumpf.

First time mom takes your temperature 'the old-fashioned way'

"Joey, this is either an exit or an entrance, or both..."


I had to get a suppository when I was a kid and any time I hear a rubber glove snap my sphincter still tightens up.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 05, 2022, 04:37:22 PM
I subscribe to the theory that this is internal GOP sabotage, they want to get rid of a liability.
Primary is coming up soon, timing is too good.

GOP leaks this video to bring down a liability in Cawthorn.
GOP leaks the Supreme Court papers to put pressure on the justices not to change their vote.

Both make too much sense. Cawthorn seems like a lock to be a GOP leak, especially after the cocaine orgies allegations. The Supreme Court leak we will probably never know.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 05, 2022, 04:41:03 PM
Primary is coming up soon, timing is too good.

GOP leaks this video to bring down a liability in Cawthorn.
GOP leaks the Supreme Court papers to put pressure on the justices not to change their vote.

Both make too much sense. Cawthorn seems like a lock to be a GOP leak, especially after the cocaine orgies allegations. The Supreme Court leak we will probably never know.

Those coke orgies must have hit too close to home for a few members of Congress.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 05, 2022, 05:52:24 PM
I still don't know what the freak was going on in that video.  Was he drunk?
He was recreating the weekend at the Anchor Inn.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 05, 2022, 06:22:15 PM
What is the right age for kids to learn about anal sex?

Rather than abortion, I feel like this is one of those issues that's best decided on a local level.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 05, 2022, 08:24:05 PM
Primary is coming up soon, timing is too good.

GOP leaks this video to bring down a liability in Cawthorn.
GOP leaks the Supreme Court papers to put pressure on the justices not to change their vote.

Both make too much sense. Cawthorn seems like a lock to be a GOP leak, especially after the cocaine orgies allegations. The Supreme Court leak we will probably never know.

Again though, why does this bring Cawthorn down? Who's changing their vote because he indulged in what appears to be a bit of gay horseplay?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 05, 2022, 08:38:24 PM
Again though, why does this bring Cawthorn down? Who's changing their vote because he indulged in what appears to be a bit of gay horseplay?
The R primary voter presented with an ideologically identical alternative minus all the baggage.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 05, 2022, 11:57:47 PM
The R primary voter presented with an ideologically identical alternative minus all the baggage.
This. Plenty of people with that ideology that aren't this outwardly crazy. But nothing seems to matter in the last 6+ years, so this likely won't either
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 06, 2022, 08:36:38 AM
Susan Collins: I support abortion rights.

Also Susan Collins: I do not support legislature that guarantees abortion rights.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 06, 2022, 10:31:01 AM
The R primary voter presented with an ideologically identical alternative minus all the baggage.

I know this place has a caricature in their mind of what the common R voter is like, but I honestly don't think with the exception of a very very small fringe, that anyone is going to give a excrement about this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 06, 2022, 10:53:57 AM
I know this place has a caricature in their mind of what the common R voter is like, but I honestly don't think with the exception of a very very small fringe, that anyone is going to give a excrement about this.

I agree. A very significant number of Republican voters were willing to re-elect an actual paedophile, so I don't see how this moves the needle.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 06, 2022, 10:54:55 AM
Then again, to my knowledge, Collinford Mattis has yet to be disbarred for throwing a freaking molotov at a cop car, so who knows.
give till it hurts
https://www.supportcolin.com
https://fundrazr.com/supportcolinford?ref=ab_8hVgbgxsNWl8hVgbgxsNWl
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 06, 2022, 11:37:00 AM
Those coke orgies must have hit too close to home for a few members of Congress.
Doing blow's the GOP status quo?  : )

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gays_for_Trump

https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Republican%27s_Nightmare_-_A_Gay_Socialist.jpg

Cum Nov., Washington may be cum a red state
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/46/Gay_Mens_Chorus_of_Washington_DC.jpg/800px-Gay_Mens_Chorus_of_Washington_DC.jpg)


"Not funny cuntface, politics is serious!"
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/08/Angry_woman.jpg/320px-Angry_woman.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 06, 2022, 12:02:24 PM
I agree. A very significant number of Republican voters were willing to re-elect an actual paedophile, so I don't see how this moves the needle.

For purposes of clarification, Joe Biden is a Democrat!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 06, 2022, 12:37:06 PM
(https://media.giphy.com/media/yZvI6DPmYFYwjgvi20/giphy.gif)


(https://media.giphy.com/media/RYTpiESltBeKs/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on May 06, 2022, 01:50:47 PM
https://nypost.com/2022/05/06/andrew-wilhoite-charged-with-killing-wife-wins-primary-election/

Another stellar GOP candidate
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 06, 2022, 03:01:02 PM
https://nypost.com/2022/05/06/andrew-wilhoite-charged-with-killing-wife-wins-primary-election/

Another stellar GOP candidate
That piece of shlt monster's probably in favor of the death penalty.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 06, 2022, 03:04:20 PM
That piece of shlt monster's probably in favor of the death penalty.

Irony is funny some times.

Probably unrelated to the above:

https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1522610171796676609?t=TlX3fTpE41EiH3dvo4uBQA&s=19 (https://twitter.com/tomselliott/status/1522610171796676609?t=TlX3fTpE41EiH3dvo4uBQA&s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 08, 2022, 06:22:25 PM
Just leaving this here.

https://twitter.com/MeidasTouch/status/1523129909828194304?t=viwRqusW4Rmhxz2SHqRbiw&s=19 (https://twitter.com/MeidasTouch/status/1523129909828194304?t=viwRqusW4Rmhxz2SHqRbiw&s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 08, 2022, 06:27:50 PM
Just leaving this here.

https://twitter.com/MeidasTouch/status/1523129909828194304?t=viwRqusW4Rmhxz2SHqRbiw&s=19 (https://twitter.com/MeidasTouch/status/1523129909828194304?t=viwRqusW4Rmhxz2SHqRbiw&s=19)

That's some absurd scare tactic, but that'll happen when you take stock from the derriere end of twitter.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 08, 2022, 07:37:33 PM
My favorite part about the protests outside of Cavanaugh's house are that people can't use his neighbors as an excuse not to do it because they are the ones organizing the protests.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 08, 2022, 08:21:41 PM
I thought Jerry Mander was republican.  wth

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/04/new-york-judge-democrats-redistricting-00030015?_amp=true
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 08, 2022, 09:40:44 PM
I thought Jerry Mander was republican.  wth

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/05/04/new-york-judge-democrats-redistricting-00030015?_amp=true

It's okay when we (D)o it!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 09, 2022, 08:15:55 AM
It's okay when we (D)o it!
NY Dems made the fatal flaw of not completely packing the state judiciary before going for it. Patiently waiting for red states to follow suit and overturn their own gerrymandering.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 09, 2022, 01:29:09 PM
It's okay when we (D)o it!
NY Dems made the fatal flaw of not completely packing the state judiciary before going for it. Patiently waiting for red states to follow suit and overturn their own gerrymandering.

What are you two intractable, irascible extremist kooks talking about?

I’m talking about Gerry Mander
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jerry_Mander

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 10, 2022, 08:53:15 AM
Senate passed a bill to increase security protection for SCOTUS members and their families with unanimous consent.

My takeaway from this is that protesting outside of their houses was working.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 10, 2022, 10:39:32 AM
Senate passed a bill to increase security protection for SCOTUS members and their families with unanimous consent.

My takeaway from this is that protesting outside of their houses was working.

Or more likely after January 6th and realizing we live in a world of psychopaths that they wanted to be proactive
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on May 10, 2022, 04:54:39 PM
Senate passed a bill to increase security protection for SCOTUS members and their families with unanimous consent.

My takeaway from this is that protesting outside of their houses was working.

Meanwhile in Maine, Susan Collins called the police over this:
(https://preview.redd.it/jpoi6e10koy81.jpg?width=576&auto=webp&s=6bdbb82269faa8867dce748c1ac2b8ce046f89cf)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 10, 2022, 06:10:29 PM
They even said please!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 11, 2022, 09:20:36 PM
Thoughts and prayers for the poor little justices

https://twitter.com/TheDailyShow/status/1524162051479769088?t=g0bL9zuvQXcrJfEoKlDEWg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 11, 2022, 09:25:08 PM
Thoughts and prayers for the poor little justices

https://twitter.com/TheDailyShow/status/1524162051479769088?t=g0bL9zuvQXcrJfEoKlDEWg&s=19


Shitting Kavanaugh's mailbox should be protected speech.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 13, 2022, 08:46:36 PM
Having a normal one

https://twitter.com/EliseStefanik/status/1525187193702055940?t=iRkeI6VGyhCSUxohO12OsQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 14, 2022, 02:04:45 PM
The vast majority (but not all) of people who formula feed are the breastfeeding equivalent of being an antivaxxer
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 14, 2022, 02:13:22 PM
The vast majority (but not all) of people who formula feed are the breastfeeding equivalent of being an antivaxxer
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220514/56cd5e5233f3fee5f7e6d8dd2ab44b39.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 14, 2022, 02:49:18 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220514/56cd5e5233f3fee5f7e6d8dd2ab44b39.jpg)

tldr formula feeding your kid isnt as good as the tit and can have lifelong consequences on them . There are rare but legitimate exceptions for mothers to not do it. But the United States has appallingly high formula fed rates
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 14, 2022, 03:13:17 PM
While I understand that scientifically it's established fact that breastfeeding is healthier than formula, and I respect that you come at this from an angle of having a medical education, I think it's probably best that those of us who don't have children refrain from being too judgemental about these sorts of parenting decisions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 14, 2022, 03:23:26 PM
Breastfeeding is better but it ain't my titty that's getting sucked on.  If I don't start losing some weight I'm gonna start lactating gravy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 14, 2022, 03:51:21 PM
Breastfeeding is better but it ain't my titty that's getting sucked on.  If I don't start losing some weight I'm gonna start lactating gravy.
That might be useful at the tailgate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 14, 2022, 03:52:50 PM
While I understand that scientifically it's established fact that breastfeeding is healthier than formula, and I respect that you come at this from an angle of having a medical education, I think it's probably best that those of us who don't have children refrain from being too judgemental about these sorts of parenting decisions.
I place dcm's take on formula about half a degree higher in respectability than mj's take on what's being taught in grade schools.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 14, 2022, 04:35:10 PM
While I understand that scientifically it's established fact that breastfeeding is healthier than formula, and I respect that you come at this from an angle of having a medical education, I think it's probably best that those of us who don't have children refrain from being too judgemental about these sorts of parenting decisions.

Nah

But I'll also judge parents for having grotesquely obese kids, smoking around their kids, or being stupid cunts who don't want their kids vaccinated because of the mEtAlZ and preservatives. I get that it's inconvenient to pump and all that excrement and probably doesn't feel the greatest. But there's a ton of countries that have something like 98-99% of their babies breast fed. I think the US has something like the 3rd lowest percentage of any industrialized country
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 14, 2022, 04:35:21 PM
I place dcm's take on formula about half a degree higher in respectability than mj's take on what's being taught in grade schools.

Note to self: dip the edibles in ex-lax next time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 14, 2022, 04:38:19 PM
I place dcm's take on formula about half a degree higher in respectability than mj's take on what's being taught in grade schools.


Fortunately in this case this isn't my opinion. It's uninamous consensus of the entire medical community. There's a segment of medical experts that supports supplementing breastfeeding with formula to make it more convenient, and that's not what I'm discussing here.

There is literally nobody who advocates for formula over the tit under ordinary circumstances. Medical exceptions are obviously medical exceptions
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 14, 2022, 05:14:24 PM
I'll also judge parents for having grotesquely obese kids, smoking around their kids, or being stupid cunts who don't want their kids vaccinated because of the mEtAlZ and preservatives.

I think that conflating these things with using formula to supplement breastfeeding is somewhat disingenuous. I get that your issue is with the idea of formula as an exercise in convenience over breastfeeding, but having neither children nor breasts, again I'd suggest that there's maybe an element of lived experience you (and I) are lacking that would be helpful to inform such sweeping statements.

This is a social issue, not a medical one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 14, 2022, 05:35:06 PM
I think that conflating these things with using formula to supplement breastfeeding is somewhat disingenuous. I get that your issue is with the idea of formula as an exercise in convenience over breastfeeding, but having neither children nor breasts, again I'd suggest that there's maybe an element of lived experience you (and I) are lacking that would be helpful to inform such sweeping statements.

This is a social issue, not a medical one.

I'm borderline illiterate, so I'll restate my viewpoint. if I suggested that people who supplement breastfeeding with formula were included in my above statements that was not my intention.

I am purely pointing a finger at people who opt not to breastfeed and instead use formula.

Which I do think is a medical issue, since there's a strong body of evidence supporting the short and long term medical risks of doing so.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 14, 2022, 05:37:12 PM
I do find it interesting that I'm arguing about freaking breastfeeding on here lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 14, 2022, 05:52:01 PM
I do find it interesting that I'm arguing about freaking breastfeeding on here lol

I'm personally quite excited for suckling on Bo's gravy funbags in the fall.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 14, 2022, 06:14:43 PM
I'm personally quite excited for suckling on Bo's gravy funbags in the fall.
$1.35 for the 1st minute, 45 cents each additional minute.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 14, 2022, 06:27:56 PM
There's a segment of medical experts that supports supplementing breastfeeding with formula to make it more convenient, and that's not what I'm discussing here.

That's the norm. They tell you to breastfeed as much as you can and then supplement as needed for the health of the baby.

You're arguing against a largely nonexistent stance. Like people who feed their cats a vegan diet or whatever dumb excrement that everyone agrees is wrong.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 14, 2022, 06:31:49 PM
Note to self: dip the edibles in ex-lax next time.
My black transgender Marxist training will protect me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 14, 2022, 07:34:31 PM
That's the norm. They tell you to breastfeed as much as you can and then supplement as needed for the health of the baby.

You're arguing against a largely nonexistent stance. Like people who feed their cats a vegan diet or whatever dumb excrement that everyone agrees is wrong.

I don't agree that feeding cats a vegan diet is wrong, I'd much rather they lived on vegetables than birds. TBF I'd much rather they just died but that's just my thing with cats.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 14, 2022, 09:14:31 PM
My black transgender Marxist training will protect me.
Bladger.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 15, 2022, 05:27:52 AM
That's the norm. They tell you to breastfeed as much as you can and then supplement as needed for the health of the baby.

You're arguing against a largely nonexistent stance. Like people who feed their cats a vegan diet or whatever dumb excrement that everyone agrees is wrong.

Yes a mix of both is normal. But the percentage of people who don't do it at all is roughly 20%

The United States numbers suck here, pun intended
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 15, 2022, 05:30:14 AM
I don't agree that feeding cats a vegan diet is wrong, I'd much rather they lived on vegetables than birds. TBF I'd much rather they just died but that's just my thing with cats.

I'm with you on the cat genocide.

But cats  like dogs should absolutely not be freaking vegans

IIRC cats are considered obligate carnivores, so feeding them a vegan diet should be considered animal abuse.

Though I think cats are better used as a key ingredient in Chinese food
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 15, 2022, 04:08:06 PM
Lol, Karl take the wheel.

https://www.fortune.com/2022/05/14/baby-formula-shortage-milk-monopoly-fda/ (https://www.fortune.com/2022/05/14/baby-formula-shortage-milk-monopoly-fda/)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 15, 2022, 04:13:41 PM
Lol, Karl take the wheel.

https://www.fortune.com/2022/05/14/baby-formula-shortage-milk-monopoly-fda/ (https://www.fortune.com/2022/05/14/baby-formula-shortage-milk-monopoly-fda/)

Of course the logical response to this is that it's yet another instance where proper leadership was apparently able to mitigate corporate greed as opposed to the demented old bat currently occupying the oval office.

Thanks Trump!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 15, 2022, 04:24:16 PM
Nationalize the health industry.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 15, 2022, 04:46:14 PM
Of course the logical response to this is that it's yet another instance where proper leadership was apparently able to mitigate corporate greed as opposed to the demented old bat currently occupying the oval office.

Thanks Trump!

Uh.... did you read the article?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 15, 2022, 06:11:17 PM
Nationalize the health industry.

Medicare for all with a private supplemental component + death panels and we might have a real thing going for us
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 17, 2022, 09:44:42 PM
Was reading more about this formula shortage.

I know some are quick to blame 4 companies for making up 90% of the US baby formula market (which makes up 98% of baby formula in the states)

But apparently the freaking fda has only 9 people to inspect plants approve baby food being sold. Responsible for the entire United States plus several plants in Europe and Mexico.

So in this case it seems like it's a combination of big government and greedy industry titans causing this problem
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 18, 2022, 07:29:06 AM


Was reading more about this formula shortage.

I know some are quick to blame 4 companies for making up 90% of the US baby formula market (which makes up 98% of baby formula in the states)

But apparently the freaking fda has only 9 people to inspect plants approve baby food being sold. Responsible for the entire United States plus several plants in Europe and Mexico.

So in this case it seems like it's a combination of big government and greedy industry titans causing this problem

"only 9 people"

"big government"

You see the issue here, right? How is federal understaffing a "big government" issue? If anything it's the result of lean "run it like a business" small government ideology.

Like the decimation of the IRS in recent years, it's intentional. The most powerful people prop up the politicians who'll do their bidding and make sure they get away with murder. Whether it's regulation skirting, monopolizing, tax evasion, etc.

If all the car dealerships in NYC gave Eric Adams millions in campaign cash and then he spent his first year as mayor slashing tires on all the city buses, the correct conclusion is not "guess that shows city government doesn't work."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 18, 2022, 08:31:21 AM

"only 9 people"

"big government"

You see the issue here, right? How is federal understaffing a "big government" issue? If anything it's the result of lean "run it like a business" small government ideology.

Like the decimation of the IRS in recent years, it's intentional. The most powerful people prop up the politicians who'll do their bidding and make sure they get away with murder. Whether it's regulation skirting, monopolizing, tax evasion, etc.

If all the car dealerships in NYC gave Eric Adams millions in campaign cash and then he spent his first year as mayor slashing tires on all the city buses, the correct conclusion is not "guess that shows city government doesn't work."

The 9 people isn't the reason it's big government, the fact that these companies can't bring their products to the market without inspection by the federal government is. The fact that there's only 9 people doing this job goes to show you how grossly inefficient the government is, drastically exacerbating this problem.

Businesses are efficient (relatively speaking). When that one factory shut down creating a shortage, I'm sure there were dozens able to jump in and take its place within days. However the bottleneck will be the government approval/inspection which will take weeks to months.

Hell this has become a congressional issue where they're introducing legislation to increase funding for these inspectors to hire additional staff. How long do you think it'll take to get legislation introduced, passed, employees hired and trained by the government?

To me that's something I'd postulate taking months. Where as a private company could do it in days to weeks.

The lean methodology for the government is likely more focused on budgetary than regulatory (and let's be honest the government is not lean what so freaking ever when it comes to the budget. It's more like slashing funding for one project so you can give it to the dudes bribing you)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 18, 2022, 02:03:56 PM
Big 'gum'mint

(https://media.giphy.com/media/pASinOwAkngwIY13vQ/giphy-downsized-large.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 18, 2022, 04:43:54 PM
Pretty bad when a media source that has pretty much served as a veritable stenographer calls you out on your whacked Similac counterattack

https://www.msnbc.com/opinion/msnbc-opinion/why-biden-s-response-baby-formula-shortage-disappointing-n1295492
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 19, 2022, 08:07:46 AM


The lean methodology for the government is likely more focused on budgetary than regulatory

And THAT'S why there are only 9 people. That's my entire point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 19, 2022, 08:09:17 AM
https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1526947128454565889?t=cFMvO4oxisyXP3Kk3Awg8Q&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 19, 2022, 08:16:01 AM
https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1526947128454565889?t=cFMvO4oxisyXP3Kk3Awg8Q&s=19
That lady ain't playin.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 19, 2022, 08:24:07 AM
Huh.

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1527101944086401025?s=20&t=sIVKpStpNnXswch0UGJXCA (https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1527101944086401025?s=20&t=sIVKpStpNnXswch0UGJXCA)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 19, 2022, 12:32:28 PM
Huh.

https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1527101944086401025?s=20&t=sIVKpStpNnXswch0UGJXCA (https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1527101944086401025?s=20&t=sIVKpStpNnXswch0UGJXCA)
Unconscionably partisan - and screw the GOP legislators who withheld support.  That said, this shouldn't have even approached a tipping point before our incompetent, monday morning quarterback administration went about about addressing it.  Case after case of deer-caught-in-the-headlights and then futilely scrambling after the fact....  Podium boy.. 

  ~ Nina Titskowicz 2024 ~
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bd/Nina_Jankowicz_DHS_portrait.jpg/185px-Nina_Jankowicz_DHS_portrait.jpg)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 19, 2022, 01:03:48 PM
Unconscionably partisan - and screw the GOP legislators who withheld support.  That said, this shouldn't have even approached a tipping point before our incompetent, monday morning quarterback administration went about about addressing it.  Case after case of deer-caught-in-the-headlights and then futilely scrambling after the fact....  Podium boy.. 

  ~ Nina Titskowicz 2024 ~
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bd/Nina_Jankowicz_DHS_portrait.jpg/185px-Nina_Jankowicz_DHS_portrait.jpg)



I don't know what was in either. But there were two seperate bills, both passed. And the one had bipartisan backing

I do find it interesting when you see things like this though

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/19/a-dereliction-of-duty-us-lawmakers-grill-fda-commissioner-over-baby-formula-shortage-.html

Lawmakers call the fda incompetent derelicts, hours after voting to give them millions of dollars to fix the problem they created
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 19, 2022, 01:27:48 PM
I don't know what was in either. But there were two seperate bills, both passed. And the one had bipartisan backing

I do find it interesting when you see things like this though

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/19/a-dereliction-of-duty-us-lawmakers-grill-fda-commissioner-over-baby-formula-shortage-.html

Lawmakers call the fda incompetent derelicts, hours after voting to give them millions of dollars to fix the problem they created

The one that passed with bipartisan support expanded access to the types of formula that can be purchased with WIC benefits. The one that passed based on party lines was the one that allocated money directly to the FDA to fix the problem.

It's the FDA's problem to fix, they deserve a lot of criticism for how they handled it, and they need money to fix it. Telling them to fix it without the funding doesn't help anybody.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 19, 2022, 02:26:55 PM
The one that passed with bipartisan support expanded access to the types of formula that can be purchased with WIC benefits. The one that passed based on party lines was the one that allocated money directly to the FDA to fix the problem.

It's the FDA's problem to fix, they deserve a lot of criticism for how they handled it, and they need money to fix it. Telling them to fix it without the funding doesn't help anybody.

I get it. But it's a stark contrast to how the private world would work.

If someone is monumentally incompetent in the private sector, you bring someone else in to fix it.

Obviously things are a little different with the government, but I'd think it makes sense to bring someone else in to oversee the process
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 19, 2022, 03:10:48 PM
Nice milkers Joe but you can't breastfeed your way outta this..

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/3/36/Joe_Biden_%28The_Onion%2C_2009%29.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 20, 2022, 11:01:39 PM
https://twitter.com/theamyalbertson/status/1527715508216135680?t=k3VS-6RghyVIS1e_uaLLYQ&s=19 (https://twitter.com/theamyalbertson/status/1527715508216135680?t=k3VS-6RghyVIS1e_uaLLYQ&s=19)

This should be fun.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 21, 2022, 12:40:40 AM
https://twitter.com/theamyalbertson/status/1527715508216135680?t=k3VS-6RghyVIS1e_uaLLYQ&s=19 (https://twitter.com/theamyalbertson/status/1527715508216135680?t=k3VS-6RghyVIS1e_uaLLYQ&s=19)

This should be fun.

It's not
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 21, 2022, 10:49:26 AM
dcm: sarcasm translator.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 21, 2022, 07:55:37 PM
More pent up bullshit leaking from the people who were mad they couldn't call Bernie Sanders antisemitic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 22, 2022, 11:43:36 AM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K5qyTY1fS9c
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 23, 2022, 06:31:35 PM
Thread:

https://twitter.com/DKThomp/status/1528808994084728834?t=HmTm08L9dw07rd2_IZeqOw&s=19

"Everything is terrible and nothing should change too much" is a perfect summation of a very prevalent and useless attitude among US voters
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 23, 2022, 06:38:44 PM
Thread:

https://twitter.com/DKThomp/status/1528808994084728834?t=HmTm08L9dw07rd2_IZeqOw&s=19

"Everything is terrible and nothing should change too much" is a perfect summation of a very prevalent and useless attitude among US voters

I think it's both hysterical and severely depressing that 78% of Americans think they're doing well financially.

I'm sure much of the world isn't any better but Americans are financially illiterate freaking retards
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 23, 2022, 06:47:35 PM
I think it's both hysterical and severely depressing that 78% of Americans think they're doing well financially.

I'm sure much of the world isn't any better but Americans are financially illiterate freaking retards

I think that context matters. "Doing well financially" is a wholly subjective thing, and one person's financial goals and challenges are entirely different to another's. "I'm making rent and putting food on the table every month with only one job" might be one person's huge leap forward, while "I'm going to have to put off doing the addition and keep my two year old car for another year because interest rates are terrifying me" is someone else's version of teetering on the edge of ruin.

I don't think that the table in that tweet is particularly informative or helpful, at least not in the way Badger thinks it is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 23, 2022, 07:09:23 PM
I think that context matters. "Doing well financially" is a wholly subjective thing, and one person's financial goals and challenges are entirely different to another's. "I'm making rent and putting food on the table every month with only one job" might be one person's huge leap forward, while "I'm going to have to put off doing the addition and keep my two year old car for another year because interest rates are terrifying me" is someone else's version of teetering on the edge of ruin.

I don't think that the table in that tweet is particularly informative or helpful, at least not in the way Badger thinks it is.

Of course it's Subjective, but you can be Subjective and wrong.

How many Americans don't think they're overweight?

How many people have to work until their deaths or retire in absolute poverty because they have literally nothing saved?

There's a fair amount of people who are some shade of okay.

But there's a lot more who are in dire circumstances
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 23, 2022, 07:27:21 PM
Of course it's Subjective, but you can be Subjective and wrong.

How many Americans don't think they're overweight?

How many people have to work until their deaths or retire in absolute poverty because they have literally nothing saved?

There's a fair amount of people who are some shade of okay.

But there's a lot more who are in dire circumstances

Why is it always weight or money with you?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 23, 2022, 07:36:23 PM
Why is it always weight or money with you?

In this case it's because he posted a graph about money and the economy.

But in general I think health + finances are the two most important issues on a national level by a tremendous margin.

I'm much more interested in issues that severely impact 90+ % of the population, than the typical political nonsense where people are crying or outraged over some freaking nonsense that will impact 1 in 10,000 people.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 23, 2022, 07:46:33 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/This_is_Just_Intermission_-_Paramount_Theatre%2C_Seattle.jpg/640px-This_is_Just_Intermission_-_Paramount_Theatre%2C_Seattle.jpg)


(https://media.giphy.com/media/uhL7VCkLcuRtS/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 23, 2022, 07:56:10 PM
Of course it's Subjective, but you can be Subjective and wrong.

How many Americans don't think they're overweight?

How many people have to work until their deaths or retire in absolute poverty because they have literally nothing saved?

There's a fair amount of people who are some shade of okay.

But there's a lot more who are in dire circumstances

Sure, and I'm not disagreeing with your point. Rather I'm casting doubts on the relevance of the "data" being presented, which is (as far as I can tell) entirely driven by opinion and context, and not in any way normalized.

To me the most you can read from it is that a lot of people are saying "I'm doing OK by the standards I set for myself, but I recognise that a lot of other people are struggling". Which doesn't seem like an entirely unfair position, although it does raise one rather obvious statistical issue - if 20some % of people think they're not doing financially OK but over 50% of people think that other people are not, then clearly there's about 30% of people who say that they're doing OK but others think they aren't. Which then raises the question as to whether the issue is the self delusion of people who are struggling but think they aren't, or people assuming that others who are actually quite happy should be doing better.

There are a lot more questions and uncertainties in that tweet than there is anything of any real value.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 26, 2022, 08:18:33 AM
Record turnout in Georgia's primary. So much for MuH sUpPrEsSiOn.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 26, 2022, 10:35:58 AM
Record turnout in Georgia's primary. So much for MuH sUpPrEsSiOn.
Stacey's qualm has got the R-bomb

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8b/Stacy%27s_Mom_%28album%29.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 26, 2022, 12:24:55 PM
Filibuster strikes again.

https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1529862443895345152?t=f1nNlzzfijQU0kmNNFEOuw&s=19 (https://twitter.com/kylegriffin1/status/1529862443895345152?t=f1nNlzzfijQU0kmNNFEOuw&s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 30, 2022, 04:58:52 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/29/pelosis-husband-arrested-on-suspicion-of-dui-in-california.html

More of those rules for thee but not for me shenanigans
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 30, 2022, 06:11:01 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/29/pelosis-husband-arrested-on-suspicion-of-dui-in-california.html

More of those rules for thee but not for me shenanigans
Well, he did get arrested like everyone else. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on May 30, 2022, 06:28:41 PM
Well, he did get arrested like everyone else. 

We'll see if he gets charged
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on May 30, 2022, 06:31:22 PM
We'll see if he gets charged
No worse than an athlete.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 31, 2022, 01:10:05 PM
https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/29/pelosis-husband-arrested-on-suspicion-of-dui-in-california.html

More of those rules for thee but not for me shenanigans
Well, he did get arrested like everyone else. 
We'll see if he gets charged
No worse than an athlete.

Above: an interesting case study in "interpretive partisanship" here (and below).  Above we have a case of 'their team/our team'  ping-ponging "ah-ha! vis-a-vis "no big deal."

Below: a newspaper account that goes out of its way to glean an opinion (all well and good) from a progressive "our team" source:

https://abc7news.com/nancy-pelosi-paul-porsche-dui-napa-husband/11907704/

"I don't think we should be paying much attention to what her husband is doing because again, he is not an elected official," said political science professor Melissa Michelson who is also the Dean of Arts and Sciences at Menlo College.

https://www.menlo.edu/about/find-an-expert/melissa-michelson/



Having said that, my learned take??

Paulie Pelosi: like Paul Newman once said: why go out for hamburger when you can have filet mignon at home??

(https://media.giphy.com/media/uhL7VCkLcuRtS/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 31, 2022, 03:02:30 PM
[/url]

"I don't think we should be paying much attention to what her husband is doing because again, he is not an elected official," said political science professor Melissa Michelson who is also the Dean of Arts and Sciences at Menlo College.

LOL


Paulie Pelosi: like Paul Newman once said: why go out for hamburger when you can have filet mignon at home??


Pretty sure drunken degenerate with a badge Vin Makasian paraphrased this when beating up Melfi's date.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 01, 2022, 12:04:53 AM

Pretty sure drunken degenerate with a badge Vin Makasian paraphrased this when beating up Melfi's date.
2 pt. deduction: irrelevant pop culture ref.     Pls. stay on point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 01, 2022, 12:10:26 AM
2 pt. deduction: irrelevant pop culture ref.     Pls. stay on point.

oh, you musta been at da top of your fuckin class.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 01, 2022, 04:37:09 PM
oh, you musta been at da top of your fuckin class.
res ipsa loquitur

the first mistake Melfi's date made was turning into that side street to pull over - should've stayed on the main drag under a bright streetlight

actually he should've stayed put at her place, ordered take out and spent the evening banging Melfi (Lorraine Bracco = bangable)



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 01, 2022, 06:14:23 PM

actually he should've stayed put at her place, ordered take out and spent the evening banging Melfi (Lorraine Bracco = bangable)

I'd totally bang Lorraine Bracco.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on June 01, 2022, 07:01:07 PM
I'd totally bang Lorraine Bracco.

"put the gun down, Karen."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 01, 2022, 08:21:28 PM

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/c/cb/Wikimedia_Civility_Ad.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 03, 2022, 09:11:37 PM
https://twitter.com/ABC/status/1532827134980505606?t=MTHFjSmfBnNIDfrg5RwStA&s=19

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 06, 2022, 08:55:38 AM
LOL

https://www.wcbe.org/wcbe-news/2022-06-03/republicans-in-the-ohio-house-vote-to-put-canada-on-a-federal-watch-list

Good to know that Ohio is such a brilliantly run state that the politicians there have nothing better to do than this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 06, 2022, 11:18:30 AM
LOL

https://www.wcbe.org/wcbe-news/2022-06-03/republicans-in-the-ohio-house-vote-to-put-canada-on-a-federal-watch-list

Good to know that Ohio is such a brilliantly run state that the politicians there have nothing better to do than this.

Ohio has produced the most astronauts of any state in the Union, mostly because it's such an awful place to live that people will do anything to get as far away from it as possible.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 06, 2022, 11:20:27 AM
Ohio has produced the most astronauts of any state in the Union, mostly because it's such an awful place to live that people will do anything to get as far away from it as possible.

(https://c.tenor.com/kkAG8vGKEO0AAAAd/golf-clap.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 07, 2022, 07:49:52 PM
Andrew Yang didn't know what gerrymandering was in 2016

https://twitter.com/AndrewYang/status/1534286267235573760?t=tqBTsgwRA5RgJZv0iOKGBA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 07, 2022, 08:20:17 PM
Free Dr. Lysol!

https://twitter.com/Brendelbored/status/1534150716784316416?t=4MtB-_Eo5GcHz6IIAgGipw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 08, 2022, 12:58:34 PM
https://twitter.com/Phil_Lewis_/status/1534557129696231430?t=EANLuk7N7VLoZU2PfXMO2A&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 08, 2022, 01:53:52 PM
I can never tell whether your politicians are actually this stupid, or if they just think that you are.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 08, 2022, 03:01:14 PM
I can never tell whether your politicians are actually this stupid, or if they just think that you are.

Both
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on June 08, 2022, 03:25:45 PM
Both

Agreed, but mostly the latter.
They are fully aware of how easily manipulated and ignorant most citizens are, so their main job is to exploit that. They despise their constituents, and fellate their donors.

Other than that, USA! USA! USA! Muh Constatoooshun and Bible!! (Almost nobody has actually read either, but still...)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 08, 2022, 05:58:13 PM
Agreed, but mostly the latter.
They are fully aware of how easily manipulated and ignorant most citizens are, so their main job is to exploit that. They despise their constituents, and fellate their donors.

I give the DNC a lot of credit, they never fail to understand how absolutely freaking stupid and easily manipulated their base is.
 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 08, 2022, 06:07:08 PM
I give the DNC a lot of credit, they never fail to understand how absolutely freaking stupid and easily manipulated their base is.
 

.... while only MENSA candidates vote for Republicans?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 08, 2022, 07:00:19 PM
.... while only MENSA candidates vote for Republicans?


No, both parties certainly have swaths of really dumb people that vote for each side, but the context of this conversation was specifically trying to tie all republican voters as rubes.

Anyway, just out of curiosity, where are the calls to impeach Schumer or have him censored in the Senate after his words incited a psycho to try and kill a sitting Supreme Court justice?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 08, 2022, 07:04:34 PM

No, both parties certainly have swaths of really dumb people that vote for each side, but the context of this conversation was specifically trying to tie all republican voters as rubes.

It was not. It was very clearly and very specifically painting politicians as being either immensely stupid or assuming that voters are. No partisanship was involved until you introduced it. Please try and follow the argument, counsellor.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 08, 2022, 07:08:16 PM
Other than that, USA! USA! USA! Muh Constatoooshun and Bible!! (Almost nobody has actually read either, but still...)

JE, who's that supposed to be a shot at?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 08, 2022, 07:29:44 PM
https://twitter.com/votevets/status/1534690736540639233?t=BQABtofbTR2EdWRw2eTB3g&s=19 (https://twitter.com/votevets/status/1534690736540639233?t=BQABtofbTR2EdWRw2eTB3g&s=19)

Bahahaha. Baaaaaaahahahahahahhahaha!!!BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAJAJAHAHJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAJAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAJAJAHAJAHAHAHAJAHAJAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! WOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!?!!!!?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 08, 2022, 08:04:07 PM
JE, who's that supposed to be a shot at?

Fairly sure that the Constitution and the Bible are both applicable to and supported by extensive numbers of people of all political persuasions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on June 09, 2022, 09:52:39 AM
I give the DNC a lot of credit, they never fail to understand how absolutely freaking stupid and easily manipulated their base is.

Agreed, except I don't necessarily "give credit" for self-serving, hypocritical, unethical behavior. I didn't grow up being taught that that was a virtue.
My comment was for the vast majority of politicians of both shitty parties, especially high-level career variety ie: Representatives/Senators.

I apologize if I triggered you in any way.  The pull-string on your back has to be getting worn out by now, no?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on June 09, 2022, 10:28:31 AM
David Eggert
@DavidEggert00
BREAKING: The FBI has arrested Republican candidate for governor Ryan Kelley at his home and taken him into custody.



lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 09, 2022, 11:55:42 AM
The pull-string on your back has to be getting worn out by now, no?

Hahahahahahaha that was actually pretty funny.

Anyway, just a reminder that there's a plethora of democratic politicians, schumer and ole beetlejuice lori lightfoot being chief among them who's words incited a mad man to try to bind and kill a supreme court justice in a murder-suicide.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 10, 2022, 11:37:09 PM
https://twitter.com/TheRickWilson/status/1535261029529165826?t=UuGLZGvhHPpzYYkePjGpgg&s=19 (https://twitter.com/TheRickWilson/status/1535261029529165826?t=UuGLZGvhHPpzYYkePjGpgg&s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 15, 2022, 12:34:51 AM
So since the leak of the Dobbs decision, more than 13 pro-life centers have been firebombed (I swear I seem to remember one of you sarcastically asking when the pro-choice movement has ever been violent, but I can't find the quote so whatever), and a psycho tried to literally whack out a sitting supreme court justice.

And yet 27 democrats voted against providing further security for supreme court justices and their families. I expect this from the usual suspects (Tlaib, AOC), but the NJGOP (a feckless and pathetic organization that makes the Jets under Idzik look well run) need to be hammering supposed "moderates" like Malinowski and Sherill for their vote.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 22, 2022, 11:14:12 AM
https://twitter.com/gifdsports/status/1539640836702572544?t=yls2uDDNTibiv5g6i8fNFQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 22, 2022, 05:06:03 PM
https://www.wtxl.com/news/local-news/andrew-gillum-charged-with-conspiracy-wire-fraud-and-making-false-statements

oooof.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 22, 2022, 05:21:15 PM
https://www.wtxl.com/news/local-news/andrew-gillum-charged-with-conspiracy-wire-fraud-and-making-false-statements

oooof.
Was just about to post another link to the same story.

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1539731455890309120?t=qaYb_7RdIL5_FQc7mKHquw&s=19

Wow, this guy sucks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 22, 2022, 09:04:15 PM
Yeah he probably did it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on June 22, 2022, 10:51:19 PM
Was just about to post another link to the same story.

https://twitter.com/AP/status/1539731455890309120?t=qaYb_7RdIL5_FQc7mKHquw&s=19

Wow, this guy sucks.
What a piece of excrement
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 23, 2022, 12:59:33 PM
Forget losing one’s job, why’s this lying son of a bitch not facing criminal charges and jail time

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/21/us/jason-ravnsborg-impeachment-south-dakota.amp.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 23, 2022, 01:07:50 PM
Forget losing one’s job, why’s this lying son of a bitch not facing criminal charges and jail time

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/06/21/us/jason-ravnsborg-impeachment-south-dakota.amp.html
I didn't see any details as to whether the guy he hit was just walking in the middle of the road or on the side of the road or what. Not that that matters, just curious.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 24, 2022, 09:19:35 AM
And there it is: Roe v Wade is gone.

Burn it all down, guys. You've officially failed as a society.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 24, 2022, 09:38:36 AM
And there it is: Roe v Wade is gone.

Burn it all down, guys. You've officially failed as a society.

I think this is a terrible stance (overturning it, not your comments)

But let's be freaking honest this doesn't effect 99.9% of people in anyway shape or form

Hell id say everything that happened during Covid-19 both legislativly and behaviorally is a far more damming barometer of how freaking repugnant people are
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 24, 2022, 09:40:40 AM
I think this is a terrible stance (overturning it, not your comments)

But let's be freaking honest this doesn't effect 99.9% of people in anyway shape or form

"Why do I care? I don't need an abortion."

I refer you back to the last sentence of my previous post.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 24, 2022, 09:41:41 AM
"Why do I care? I don't need an abortion."

I refer you back to the last sentence of my previous post.

I had added to my post, but there's far worse out there
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 24, 2022, 09:46:57 AM
Healthcare, homelessness, housing, education, the economy all way way way way way way way way l more important and impactful issues.

Hell this doesn't even outlaw abortion, it's just obnoxiously cunty making it much more cumbersome
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on June 24, 2022, 09:47:33 AM
But let's be freaking honest this doesn't effect 99.9% of people in anyway shape or form

man, shut the freak up
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 24, 2022, 09:49:05 AM
Healthcare, homelessness, education all way way more important and impactful issues.

Hell this doesn't even outlaw abortion, it's just obnoxiously cunty making it much more cumbersome

I presume that same sex marriage will be the next thing in SCOTUS's sights. They'll dress it up as "state's rights" again I expect, which seemed curiously absent in yesterday's ruling ordering that incels, LARPers and fantasists in NY be allowed to carry their dick extensions around with them.

Looking forward to the next round though. "I know the Republicans packed the Supreme Court and are using it to overturn women's rights but I can't vote for a Democrat in the midterms because Biden fell off his bike."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on June 24, 2022, 09:53:37 AM
Pretty shitty country we live in sometimes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 24, 2022, 09:54:16 AM
I presume that same sex marriage will be the next thing in SCOTUS's sights. They'll dress it up as "state's rights" again I expect, which seemed curiously absent in yesterday's ruling ordering that incels, LARPers and fantasists in NY be allowed to carry their dick extensions around with them.

Looking forward to the next round though. "I know the Republicans packed the Supreme Court and are using it to overturn women's rights but I can't vote for a Democrat in the midterms because Biden fell off his bike."

I think the American people would be best served if some legislation was enacted that the Supreme Court could never consist of more than half +1 of either political party

The only good thing about American government is their ability to cancel out each other's stupid freaking ideas
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 24, 2022, 09:59:14 AM
I think the American people would be best served if some legislation was enacted that the Supreme Court could never consist of more than half +1 of either political party

The only good thing about American government is their ability to cancel out each other's stupid freaking ideas

Ah, you're going with the "both sides equally bad" defense now. Wheeling out all the greatest hits today, eh?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 24, 2022, 10:01:08 AM
Ah, you're going with the "both sides equally bad" defense now. Wheeling out all the greatest hits today, eh?

No

I'm going with making it more difficult for either side to carry out their agenda means we will likely see less ridiculous bullshit from either party.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 24, 2022, 10:26:04 AM
Well this is awful.

Also, Clarence Thomas’ concurring opinion is calling for the court to overturn right to contraception, same sex marriage, and privacy in the bedroom.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 24, 2022, 10:41:18 AM
Well this is awful.

Also, Clarence Thomas’ concurring opinion is calling for the court to overturn right to contraception, same sex marriage, and privacy in the bedroom.

Presumably it's time to start outing Lindsey Graham and other Republican lackeys for their peccadilloes then. They already did it with Cawthorn.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 24, 2022, 10:48:19 AM
Presumably it's time to start outing Lindsey Graham and other Republican lackeys for their peccadilloes then. They already did it with Cawthorn.

Or start talking about what Clarence Thomas was helping his wife with.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on June 24, 2022, 11:04:20 AM
All this effort to protect unborn fetuses, and yet the ones that are alive in your schools still have to dodge bullets.



This is a terrible day for the United States of America.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 24, 2022, 03:09:11 PM
Oh than god, Pelosi read a poem and a bunch of Dems sang God Bless America on the steps of the Capitol. Glad they're doing so much.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on June 24, 2022, 03:26:35 PM
Oh than god, Pelosi read a poem and a bunch of Dems sang God Bless America on the steps of the Capitol. Glad they're doing so much.

Them funbags will set you free.  #KumBaiYaah
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 24, 2022, 05:09:23 PM
https://twitter.com/LeftHandStu/status/1540343572108648448?t=wqIHJf7RHPFztiNNmAqLOg&s=19 (https://twitter.com/LeftHandStu/status/1540343572108648448?t=wqIHJf7RHPFztiNNmAqLOg&s=19)

LOL whoops?!?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on June 24, 2022, 06:22:49 PM


But let's be freaking honest this doesn't effect 99.9% of people in anyway shape or form


What an infantile, shitty comment.

Of course any type of pregnancy or fetus or vagina will never affect you...you're a freaking virgin. And if gay marriage is attacked, so what, that's less than 10% of pEoPlE, AMIRITE??

Yes, yes, I realize I just fed the troll and the forum's resident, happy-to-fart-in-his-own-face jester.  He serves his little purpose.
Carry on, derrrrrcmmm, and try not to stumble into any open man-holes or swallow any toothpicks!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 24, 2022, 06:29:32 PM
https://twitter.com/tulsaworld/status/1540437111261855747?t=qMnMRP9VLdXC_7oEL4aG8g&s=19 (https://twitter.com/tulsaworld/status/1540437111261855747?t=qMnMRP9VLdXC_7oEL4aG8g&s=19)

I don't know what point he thinks he's making but it's not the one he actually is.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on June 24, 2022, 06:41:35 PM
https://twitter.com/tulsaworld/status/1540437111261855747?t=qMnMRP9VLdXC_7oEL4aG8g&s=19 (https://twitter.com/tulsaworld/status/1540437111261855747?t=qMnMRP9VLdXC_7oEL4aG8g&s=19)

I don't know what point he thinks he's making but it's not the one he actually is.

If the safest place for a child to be is unborn and up the snatch of some Oklahoma lady....you are officially in a 3rd world country at best.
This dude is celebrating that an unwanted zygote is safer than a small kid in an elementary classroom lolol.

I look forward to the enormous surge in Republicans adopting and fostering kids!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 24, 2022, 08:08:37 PM
The vagina is the safest place for my penis.

- President Bojangles.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 24, 2022, 08:10:38 PM
Given which Democrats are in the Senate and how technical of a majority we have, I don't understand the people who didn't think this was coming.

For the record, it's the old power Dem's fault.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 24, 2022, 08:28:26 PM
Imagine ever trusting a Republican after this.

(https://i.imgur.com/Gfkr9Gw.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 24, 2022, 09:14:12 PM
Imagine ever trusting a Republican after this.

(https://i.imgur.com/Gfkr9Gw.png)

Should all wind up in a lake of fire.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 24, 2022, 09:16:46 PM
Should all wind up in a lake of fire.

They should all be summarily removed for lying their way into the highest judicial office.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 24, 2022, 09:42:07 PM
They should all be summarily removed for lying their way into the highest judicial office.

It can be two things, JE.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 24, 2022, 09:50:44 PM
It can be two things, JE.

In fairness your solution does also encompass mine.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 25, 2022, 06:50:50 AM


But let's be freaking honest this doesn't effect 99.9% of people in anyway shape or form

"A peer-reviewed study published in 2017 estimated that in 2014, some 23.7 percent of girls and women in the United States (or roughly 1 in 4) had undergone at least one abortion between the ages of 15 and 44."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 25, 2022, 06:52:55 AM


Healthcare, homelessness, housing, education, the economy all way way way way way way way way l more important and impactful issues.

Abortion is healthcare, and not having access to it directly impacts everything else you listed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 25, 2022, 06:53:52 AM
Looking forward to the next round though. "I know the Republicans packed the Supreme Court and are using it to overturn women's rights but I can't vote for a Democrat in the midterms because Biden fell off his bike."

https://twitter.com/davidsirota/status/1540540806930395142?t=I_G2Pz2MJ0sthecwcvEUvg&s=19

Edit: I see Cato beat me to this (but it really cannot be mentioned enough)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 25, 2022, 06:55:35 AM
Oh than god, Pelosi read a poem and a bunch of Dems sang God Bless America on the steps of the Capitol. Glad they're doing so much.
You know she's so excited about the fundraising opportunity this presents.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on June 25, 2022, 07:51:41 AM
Hear me out here....let Canada take over the States in a peaceful transition.

So many problems would be solved.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 25, 2022, 08:14:10 AM
Hear me out here....let Canada take over the States in a peaceful transition.

So many problems would be solved.
You would just be too nice and then Mexico would take you over to form a giant landmass called Burrito Town.  If the name isn't false advertising, I'll be fine with it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 25, 2022, 10:36:08 AM
You know she's so excited about the fundraising opportunity this presents.

I got an email an hour later.

I have never donated to her campaign and I still get freaking emails from it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 25, 2022, 10:57:21 AM
What an infantile, shitty comment.

Of course any type of pregnancy or fetus or vagina will never affect you...you're a freaking virgin. And if gay marriage is attacked, so what, that's less than 10% of pEoPlE, AMIRITE??

Yes, yes, I realize I just fed the troll and the forum's resident, happy-to-fart-in-his-own-face jester.  He serves his little purpose.
Carry on, derrrrrcmmm, and try not to stumble into any open man-holes or swallow any toothpicks!


It was in the context of a response to someone saying something that essentially this was most the most agregious insult to American rights.

So yes I would say something that impacts 0.2% of the population is very different from something that impacts 10% of the population.

I've made it abundantly clear I support abortion on demand, in every way shape and form. And this ruling does concern me with the court being too conservative, as I could see this impacting issues which I find far more important (notably end of life care and the right to death).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on June 25, 2022, 11:22:58 AM
A nurse saying that abortion isn’t healthcare…

GTFO
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 25, 2022, 11:28:31 AM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/50/Abortion--ban-rally-4_%2847968224007%29.jpg/320px-Abortion--ban-rally-4_%2847968224007%29.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d7/Blini_with_salmon_roe.jpg/320px-Blini_with_salmon_roe.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/Xs_MG39344.jpg/320px-Xs_MG39344.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 25, 2022, 11:32:33 AM
I got an email an hour later.

I have never donated to her campaign and I still get freaking emails from it.

For some reason I also get them and I'm not allowed to donate to her even if I wanted to. Which I don't.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 25, 2022, 11:53:13 AM
I got an email an hour later.

I have never donated to her campaign and I still get freaking emails from it.
For some reason I also get them and I'm not allowed to donate to her even if I wanted to. Which I don't.
Tracking cookies

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Pears.jpg/157px-Pears.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: insanity on June 25, 2022, 12:09:09 PM
Tracking cookies

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Pears.jpg/157px-Pears.jpg)
False
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 25, 2022, 12:44:36 PM
A nurse saying that abortion isn’t healthcare…

GTFO

Do you enjoy making excrement up?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 25, 2022, 01:31:59 PM
For some reason I also get them and I'm not allowed to donate to her even if I wanted to. Which I don't.

I’ve been sending Pelosi money to fund her next facelift attached to your contact info
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 25, 2022, 01:38:49 PM
I’ve been sending Pelosi money to fund her next facelift attached to your contact info
How dare you not donate to the titty fund!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on June 25, 2022, 02:07:25 PM
It was in the context of a response to someone saying something that essentially this was most the most agregious insult to American rights.

This is clearly an egregious insult to women and women's rights. Women make up a sizeable part of Americans, last I checked.
The ruling won't have an affect on me or my immediate family, but it makes me sad and nervous for many fellow Americans  (since I care about this country and its citizens) and my little son. I think freedom and bodily autonomy are nice.



I've made it abundantly clear I support abortion on demand, in every way shape and form. And this ruling does concern me with the court being too conservative, as I could see this impacting issues which I find far more important (notably end of life care and the right to death).

Agreed, and we have similar concerns.  Again, all about freedom and autonomy. If someone's main cherry-picking reason to eliminate a right or freedom is "BIBLE JESUS HELL HEAVEN ANGRY GOD", I can't take that argument too seriously.
 It's the same folks that scream "FREEDOM" that try to limit freedom and rights at every turn when it suits their power-grab and their thirst to please Jesus and his Dad-But-Also-Him (even if they're faking that thirst in many cases).
But smelly brown Moooslims and their wacky devotion to Mooohammed and Allah is TOTES DIFFERENT!! Our fantasies and reasons to excrement on womens and fags are MOAR BETTER!

We all know some rich Republican, so-called conservative, so-called Christian will still get a safe abortion at will, no matter the state.

It's class disparity....nothing to do with the invented, propaganda-fueled  CuLcHeR wARRRzzz!!! which was designed to be a distraction for all of us lowly dirt people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 25, 2022, 02:13:48 PM
This is clearly an egregious insult to women and women's rights. Women make up a sizeable part of Americans, last I checked.
The ruling won't have an affect on me or my immediate family, but it makes me sad and nervous for many fellow Americans  (since I care about this country and its citizens) and my little son. I think freedom and bodily autonomy are nice.


Agreed, and we have similar concerns.  Again, all about freedom and autonomy. If someone's main cherry-picking reason to eliminate a right or freedom is "BIBLE JESUS HELL HEAVEN ANGRY GOD", I can't take that argument too seriously.
 It's the same folks that scream "FREEDOM" that try to limit freedom and rights at every turn when it suits their power-grab and their thirst to please Jesus and his Dad-But-Also-Him (even if they're faking that thirst in many cases).
But smelly brown Moooslims and their wacky devotion to Mooohammed and Allah is TOTES DIFFERENT!! Our fantasies and reasons to excrement on womens and fags are MOAR BETTER!

We all know some rich Republican, so-called conservative, so-called Christian will still get a safe abortion at will, no matter the state.

It's class disparity....nothing to do with the invented, propaganda-fueled  CuLcHeR wARRRzzz!!! which was designed to be a distraction for all of us lowly dirt people.

Yes women make up a sizeable portion of the populace. But 99% of women will never need nor want an abortion.

This again doesn't suggest that abortion isn't an important right, but rather that this isn't something that will have any impact whatsoever on >99% of the populations lives. Especially since this doesn't even outlaw abortion, and I imagine you will still be able to get an abortion in the vast majority of the country.

I 100% agree that this will disproportionately impact those of lower economic status in certain parts of the country.

I'm not trying to draw out an argument, I agree that this whole thing is pretty freaking terrible. I just don't think this is apocalyptic like some people would make it out to be.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 25, 2022, 02:24:47 PM


Yes women make up a sizeable portion of the populace. But 99% of women will never need nor want an abortion.

You've already been given the stats that completely disprove that. Not to mention that every abortion that doesn't happen also has a male parent.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 25, 2022, 02:49:09 PM

You've already been given the stats that completely disprove that. Not to mention that every abortion that doesn't happen also has a male parent.

If i was, I'm sorry I missed that.

I wouldn't overtly ignore statistics.

You can make the male parent argument, but then you'd have to acknowledge that not every male parent wants to abort their unborn child.

But the numbers would also be skewed to account for the fact that the vast majority of women in this country will still be able to get an abortion in their states.

As far as I can tell the vast majority of states that have outlawed abortion are tiny bumble freak states.

Texas unquestionably will be the biggest abomination. If Florida ends up following suit, which I haven't seen any speculation that it will. That would be another bad one
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 25, 2022, 03:38:28 PM
False
Nancy's pears are anything but false
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Pears.jpg/157px-Pears.jpg)

(and no, I know what you were peevishly referring to)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 25, 2022, 04:49:43 PM
Nancy's pears are anything but false
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cf/Pears.jpg/157px-Pears.jpg)

(and no, I know what you were peevishly referring to)
I'll defend her glorious honkers until the end.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on June 25, 2022, 06:26:31 PM
https://twitter.com/johncornyn/status/1540689961040482306?s=21&t=Ih0k9H3JilEPMWB3zCEm5A

Holy excrement
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 25, 2022, 06:49:15 PM
https://twitter.com/johncornyn/status/1540689961040482306?s=21&t=Ih0k9H3JilEPMWB3zCEm5A

Holy excrement

I think he's suggesting previous unjust precedents can be overruled.  Besides, Cornyn knows full well that Obergefell is next, not Brown. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on June 25, 2022, 07:41:20 PM
I think he's suggesting previous unjust precedents can be overruled.  Besides, Cornyn knows full well that Obergefell is next, not Brown. 

And I’m suggesting that if he gets the opportunity, he should kill himself
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 25, 2022, 08:22:33 PM
And I’m suggesting that if he gets the opportunity, he should kill himself

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/zz3PhWFhA3I/maxresdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 25, 2022, 08:57:31 PM
https://twitter.com/BradMossEsq/status/1540852913223991296?t=JRBOST3-Sq6BVbLKxEpZpQ&s=19 (https://twitter.com/BradMossEsq/status/1540852913223991296?t=JRBOST3-Sq6BVbLKxEpZpQ&s=19)

Can't think of anything else she could be trying to save.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 25, 2022, 08:58:07 PM



"A peer-reviewed study published in 2017 estimated that in 2014, some 23.7 percent of girls and women in the United States (or roughly 1 in 4) had undergone at least one abortion between the ages of 15 and 44."



So yes I would say something that impacts 0.2% of the population is very different from something that impacts 10% of the population.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on June 25, 2022, 08:58:17 PM
https://twitter.com/BradMossEsq/status/1540852913223991296?t=JRBOST3-Sq6BVbLKxEpZpQ&s=19 (https://twitter.com/BradMossEsq/status/1540852913223991296?t=JRBOST3-Sq6BVbLKxEpZpQ&s=19)

Can't think of anything else she could be trying to save.

Freudian slip
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 25, 2022, 09:08:14 PM


https://twitter.com/BradMossEsq/status/1540852913223991296?t=JRBOST3-Sq6BVbLKxEpZpQ&s=19 (https://twitter.com/BradMossEsq/status/1540852913223991296?t=JRBOST3-Sq6BVbLKxEpZpQ&s=19)

Can't think of anything else she could be trying to say.

She couldn't remember the whole 14 words.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 25, 2022, 09:09:55 PM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220626/1647460a057262199978868b0a66444b.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 25, 2022, 10:40:15 PM
https://twitter.com/bnnbreaking/status/1540778428798234624?s=21&t=O0IJ7F9BguwfsK-bSQ1Oiw
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 25, 2022, 10:47:28 PM
https://twitter.com/bnnbreaking/status/1540778428798234624?s=21&t=O0IJ7F9BguwfsK-bSQ1Oiw
Forgive my foreign ignorance here, what does the Pentagon have to do with it?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 25, 2022, 11:01:08 PM
Forgive my foreign ignorance here, what does the Pentagon have to do with it?



I'm guessing that since the bases are federal property, it's up to them whether they will enforce state laws governing abortions at base hospitals.

So anyone with access to a base hospital has access to abortions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 26, 2022, 08:33:09 AM
Out of curiosity, has anyone seen anything that attempts to be something in the same stratosphere as objective. As to what kind of damage this whole thing is expected to do to the GOP?

At least for the next two election cycles

For a while everyone has speculated a blood bath at the midterms, and that gap has slowly narrowed.

I wonder if the left can actually end up gaining seats, and having momentum from there.

I think this may be the most unpopular GOP decision I ever see for the entirety of my life
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 26, 2022, 08:39:03 AM





That's just an insane statistic.

I'm sure it's true. But I have to wonder if there's some footnote kinda excrement going on there. Like including the morning after pill, birth control, or just legitimate miscarriages.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 26, 2022, 02:44:11 PM
https://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/1541102529483640832?s=21&t=LRjN5MghLGAXn6Tvqy5vzQ (https://twitter.com/briantylercohen/status/1541102529483640832?s=21&t=LRjN5MghLGAXn6Tvqy5vzQ)

Oh my god. Like…holy freak…
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 26, 2022, 05:25:57 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/77/Aborted_baby.jpg/180px-Aborted_baby.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/92/Larry_King_%2833369306852%29.jpg/320px-Larry_King_%2833369306852%29.jpg)
RBG: why'd the fetus cross the road?
fetus: I dunno, why?
RBG: somebody moved the dumpster.  .......gotcha!   ;)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 26, 2022, 11:04:15 PM
Twerking for reproductive rights

https://twitter.com/ElijahSchaffer/status/1540509215587966976

https://twitter.com/SaraGonzalesTX/status/1540523415341252608
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 27, 2022, 09:55:58 AM
One of my good friends had to get an abortion last year early on in her pregnancy because tests detected potentially fatal defects in the fetus if she carried to term. I don’t know all the details, but it was one of the most heartbreaking things I’ve ever heard about. The husband, one of my best friends, was and still is traumatized by those events.

Getting an abortion for something like this is now illegal in several states. Imagine legally having to carry a baby 9 months knowing it would die. Strangely I never even once thought of the medical procedure as an “abortion”.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 27, 2022, 10:39:29 AM
One of my good friends had to get an abortion last year early on in her pregnancy because tests detected potentially fatal defects in the fetus if she carried to term. I don’t know all the details, but it was one of the most heartbreaking things I’ve ever heard about. The husband, one of my best friends, was and still is traumatized by those events.

Getting an abortion for something like this is now illegal in several states. Imagine legally having to carry a baby 9 months knowing it would die. Strangely I never even once thought of the medical procedure as an “abortion”.

Sorry to hear that. I think that all right minded humans can see the absolute travesty of this ruling, and of the vicious misogyny that is considered a wholesome feature of many US legislatures. But when it comes to actually doing anything about it, I've no doubt that the US will vote for the ongoing lie of lower taxes and safety from an old man falling off his bike.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 27, 2022, 11:14:34 AM
I think freedom and bodily autonomy are nice.

Except of course when it comes to vaccine mandates.

I presume that same sex marriage will be the next thing in SCOTUS's sights. They'll dress it up as "state's rights" again I expect, which seemed curiously absent in yesterday's ruling ordering that incels, LARPers and fantasists in NY be allowed to carry their dick extensions around with them.

I love how right before that widely spread passage from Thomas, there's a literal entire page dedicated to making it crystal clear that Dobbs should have no bearing in terms of substantive due process on non-abortion cases that's gone totally ignored. Too easy for the Judd Legum's of the world to spew openly racist horseshit towards the Court's most senior Black justice.

But, just to humor the gallery, re: Obergfell. Wake me up when it's overturned due to either a total lack of, or a faulty equal protection analysis (which should've been the sole lens from which the Court viewed the case to begin with as opposed to just an out that Roberts used in his admittedly horrible analysis to align with the conservative wing), otherwise this is just faux outrage that has no basis.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on June 27, 2022, 01:39:40 PM
Except of course when it comes to vaccine mandates.


Except I never said that, it's a false equivalency on several of the most basic levels, etc etc...pretty much par for the indoctrinated course with these types of responses.

You seem to only know to parrot what you've been told to say and believe, which would not be your fault and I'm confident you're a good dude. But knee-jerk repeating logical fallacies is not going to sway others from using their critical thinking and empathy.
(Full disclosure:  I was raised in the Jehovah's Witness cult, so I know from decades of experience. Also full disclosure: I'm sure you and most people are better Christians and Americans than anyone in that sect)

But you do you! I wish you the best, and I'm not currently in the mood to engage regarding such a blatantly cut-and-dry issue.

Sincerely,
a happy member of the pro-freedom, pro American-citizens-health-especially-women, pro-humans, anti-Bible-dictating-my-life "gallery"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 27, 2022, 01:50:47 PM
I love how right before that widely spread passage from Thomas, there's a literal entire page dedicated to making it crystal clear that Dobbs should have no bearing in terms of substantive due process on non-abortion cases that's gone totally ignored. Too easy for the Judd Legum's of the world to spew openly racist horseshit towards the Court's most senior Black justice.

But, just to humor the gallery, re: Obergfell. Wake me up when it's overturned due to either a total lack of, or a faulty equal protection analysis (which should've been the sole lens from which the Court viewed the case to begin with as opposed to just an out that Roberts used in his admittedly horrible analysis to align with the conservative wing), otherwise this is just faux outrage that has no basis.

It's not an unreasonable approach to take me onto your specialist battleground and invite me to battle on your terms, but I'm not going to do that because quite obviously I don't have the legal education to do so. As a result, I have no idea whether what you say is correct or not.

What I will say though is that Roe v Wade is settled as a precedent of the Supreme Court, it is an important precedent of the Supreme Court, it's the law of the land, and it clearly holds that the Constitution protects a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy. Would you agree?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on June 27, 2022, 01:52:02 PM
Except I never said that, it's a false equivalency on several of the most basic levels, etc etc...pretty much par for the indoctrinated course with these types of responses.

You seem to only know to parrot what you've been told to say and believe, which would not be your fault and I'm confident you're a good dude. But knee-jerk repeating logical fallacies is not going to sway others from using their critical thinking and empathy.
(Full disclosure:  I was raised in the Jehovah's Witness cult, so I know from decades of experience. Also full disclosure: I'm sure you and most people are better Christians and Americans than anyone in that sect)

But you do you! I wish you the best, and I'm not currently in the mood to engage regarding such a blatantly cut-and-dry issue.

Sincerely,
a happy member of the pro-freedom, pro American-citizens-health-especially-women, pro-humans, anti-Bible-dictating-my-life "gallery"

I remember this kid i went to junior high with.  He was a Jehovah's Witness too.  He was the only one who never had to stand for the national anthem in class. I told him he was a lucky bastard....but then i quickly rescinded that comment when i found out he never celebrated birthdays, Christmas or any other holidays.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 27, 2022, 02:08:47 PM
I remember this kid i went to junior high with.  He was a Jehovah's Witness too.  He was the only one who never had to stand for the national anthem in class. I told him he was a lucky bastard....but then i quickly rescinded that comment when i found out he never celebrated birthdays, Christmas or any other holidays.
Honest question: do they have beauty pageants?....like is there a Miss Jehovah's Witness?  Anyway, decent band name..

(https://media.giphy.com/media/GJvJkFNVaJyQ8/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on June 27, 2022, 02:37:25 PM
Honest question: do they have beauty pageants?....like is there a Miss Jehovah's Witness?  Anyway, decent band name..

(https://media.giphy.com/media/GJvJkFNVaJyQ8/giphy.gif)

To answer your honest question...Nope.
If a Witness girl showed up at one of their Kingdom Halls in that Hurley outfit, the "elders" would likely swoop in and have something to say to her.
JWs definitely treat women as more lowly and as borderine-property. Women have no authority whatsoever and are forbidden from any leadership roles (because BIBLE, naturally).

Wife and I have been free and out for a minute (which means "a long time" according to the kids), so who knows these days...they might have several pageants and Tinder sites. Since we've left I do know there are more than a few JW social media "influencers". All I can say for sure is they still love blood more than human life and the leadership has protected child molesters on a scale that would make Catholics shake their heads, so ummmm, there's that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 27, 2022, 02:44:08 PM
Unrelated, how is Elizabeth Hurley 57 years old?  That isn't possible.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on June 27, 2022, 02:52:04 PM
Unrelated, how is Elizabeth Hurley 57 years old?  That isn't possible.

Whaaaaatttt? That is legit surprising.

I had to wiki that myself, damn. And Julia Roberts is 54.  And Phoebe Cates is 58!  And Sloane from Ferris Bueller is 92!!!
I'm guessing it has something to do with time and entropy and me discovering grey chest hairs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 27, 2022, 03:56:19 PM
To answer your honest question...Nope.
If a Witness girl showed up at one of their Kingdom Halls in that Hurley outfit, the "elders" would likely swoop in and have something to say to her.
JWs definitely treat women as more lowly and as borderine-property. Women have no authority whatsoever and are forbidden from any leadership roles (because BIBLE, naturally).

Wife and I have been free and out for a minute (which means "a long time" according to the kids), so who knows these days...they might have several pageants and Tinder sites. Since we've left I do know there are more than a few JW social media "influencers". All I can say for sure is they still love blood more than human life and the leadership has protected child molesters on a scale that would make Catholics shake their heads, so ummmm, there's that.
Thx for the honest answer.  Curious, I did a quick search and came up with https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/101990007

As for Catholics, here's one you'll like:

Q: how did Cardinal Spellman die?
A: someone slipped him a poison alterboy.

Fun for all denominations:

Q: what's the difference between a circumcision and a crucifixion?
A:  with a crucifixion they throw out the whole Jew

u.s. politics: separation of church and state (establishment clause & free exercise clause--> 1st amend)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 27, 2022, 04:05:46 PM
A special interest absurdity abated....for now...     from the folks that howled 'voter suppression!"     

https://abc7ny.com/judge-ralph-porzio-non-citizens-voting-staten-island-new-york-city/11998587/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 27, 2022, 04:53:04 PM
https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1541201416949211136 (https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1541201416949211136)

Video of Rudy's "assault." 

Quote
“Yesterday, I was in Staten Island getting ready to campaign for my son. I hadn’t started yet,” Giuliani said during press conference on Facebook. “I went to the men’s room, walked back with a group of friends and all of a sudden, without any warning, was hit very, very hard on the back. To such an extent that it knocked me back about two steps. People around me helped me. People around me secured the person who did it. The videotape that you see is probably a little deceptive, it just shows a hand on my back.”

“The police observed the whole videotape, and charged him with second degree assault,” Giuliani said. He was irate, having just heard the charge was downgraded to a misdemeanor.

“I could have fallen down … Elderly people die most often from falling down,” Giuliani said.

What an absolute clown.  Good thing there was video. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 27, 2022, 05:40:45 PM
Except I never said that, it's a false equivalency on several of the most basic levels, etc etc...pretty much par for the indoctrinated course with these types of responses.

You seem to only know to parrot what you've been told to say and believe

1. Fair enough if you've never said it.

2. It's not a false equivalency when the common rallying cry is My BoDY mY cHoIcE. People were literally castigated and socially/economically sidelined for wanting autonomy over their decision not to inject a foreign substance into their body that was manufactured by pharmaceutical companies that have spent decades lying to their consumers and also ensured protection via not being able to be sued in case there were catastrophic side effects.

3. The level of projection in terms of "parrot" is what it is, but it also has no basis.

I do appreciate the kind words otherwise, sincerely.

Anyway, since Del's on a roll,

q: what's the difference between a priest and a rabbi?

a: a rabbi cuts it off and a priest sucks it off.

It's not an unreasonable approach to take me onto your specialist battleground and invite me to battle on your terms, but I'm not going to do that because quite obviously I don't have the legal education to do so. As a result, I have no idea whether what you say is correct or not.

What I will say though is that Roe v Wade is settled as a precedent of the Supreme Court, it is an important precedent of the Supreme Court, it's the law of the land, and it clearly holds that the Constitution protects a woman's right to terminate a pregnancy. Would you agree?

With the exception of being important in terms of precedent, all of this is absolutely true.

Settled precedent can be wrong. Example; I'd say a solid 80 to 90 percent of this board wishes DC vs. Heller was overturned and would have no issue with settled precedent being upended. Korematsu was settled precedent, Brown v. Board of Ed, etc. With that in mind, I do find the kvetching about precedent to be just that. No one has any issue overturning precedent they don't agree, no matter what they say in their confirmation hearings. Using guns as an example again, you'd have to be a freaking moron on the right to ever think Sotomayor or Breyer would ever not backflip at the chance to overturn Heller no matter what they said.

About ten or eleven years ago, Democrats had a filibuster proof supermajority in the Senate and never codified via legislation a woman's right to an abortion. My guess is that's probably because they knew the battle between totally satiating the AbOrTiOn On DeMaNd AnD wItHoUt aPoLoGy crowd and remaining in the good graces of the American electorate would've been impossible. Plenty of people (myself included, and for that matter most of the European nations that the left wants to follow on issues like guns, taxes, social safety net, etc.) believe in a temporal element towards the procedure in cases where it's elective i.e. where mom's health isn't in question or the child wasn't a product of rape or incest. As an example, the legislation set to go forth in Mississippi and Missouri is insane in terms of their respective restrictiveness. 

I feel the same way about Obergefell quite honestly, but also seriously would struggle (if/when this ever happened which I don't think it will), with a Supreme Court that would provide the logic that a proscription on same sex marriage would not be violative of the equal protection clause and would survive a strict scrutiny test because the state's compelling interest in preserving the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman overpowers the deprivation of same sex couples from the practice (and all of the economic and social benefits that come with being married), especially in a country with a divorce rate over 50%. So if that ever happens, please feel free to refer back to this comment and feel free to call me a hypocrite if I ever try to justify it (I won't).

Sorry to disappoint those that expect me to just "parrot" the common pro-life talking points here, but I think a fair reading of my post history would show where I've always landed on this. Admittedly I do find some of the pro-choice arguments that rely on identity politics ("no uterus no opinion") to be freaking absurd, and you'd think a lesson would be learned considering one of the 6 signing off on this majority opinion in fact has a uterus.

What I think is going to be very interesting is whether or not States that try to ban its citizens from going out of State to undergo what is absolutely a medical procedure find themselves violative of either the interstate or dormant commerce clause. I would say they are.

I am going to hold the "company line" here to close it out and say that Sotomayor's dissent in the football coach prayer case was completely ridiculous and would've never been written if say, a football coach in a heavily Muslim area (say the suburbs of Michigan) wanted to lead a post-game prayer of the Islamic faith. And to that end, I hope someone does, just to put to bed some of the hypotheticals I've been seeing from the worst ends of twitter today.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 27, 2022, 05:49:12 PM
With the exception of being important in terms of precedent, all of this is absolutely true.

Settled precedent can be wrong. Example; I'd say a solid 80 to 90 percent of this board wishes DC vs. Heller was overturned and would have no issue with settled precedent being upended. Korematsu was settled precedent, Brown v. Board of Ed, etc. With that in mind, I do find the kvetching about precedent to be just that. No one has any issue overturning precedent they don't agree, no matter what they say in their confirmation hearings. Using guns as an example again, you'd have to be a freaking moron on the right to ever think Sotomayor or Breyer would ever not backflip at the chance to overturn Heller no matter what they said.

About ten or eleven years ago, Democrats had a filibuster proof supermajority in the Senate and never codified via legislation a woman's right to an abortion. My guess is that's probably because they knew the battle between totally satiating the AbOrTiOn On DeMaNd AnD wItHoUt aPoLoGy crowd and remaining in the good graces of the American electorate would've been impossible. Plenty of people (myself included, and for that matter most of the European nations that the left wants to follow on issues like guns, taxes, social safety net, etc.) believe in a temporal element towards the procedure in cases where it's elective i.e. where mom's health isn't in question or the child wasn't a product of rape or incest. As an example, the legislation set to go forth in Mississippi and Missouri is insane in terms of their respective restrictiveness. 

I feel the same way about Obergefell quite honestly, but also seriously would struggle (if/when this ever happened which I don't think it will), with a Supreme Court that would provide the logic that a proscription on same sex marriage would survive a strict scrutiny test because the state's compelling interest in preserving the sanctity of marriage between a man and a woman overpowers the deprivation of same sex couples from the practice (and all of the economic and social benefits that come with being married), especially in a country with a divorce rate over 50%. So if that ever happens, please feel free to refer back to this comment and feel free to call me a hypocrite if I ever try to justify it (I won't).

Sorry to disappoint those that expect me to just "parrot" the common pro-life talking points here, but I think a fair reading of my post history would show where I've always landed on this. Admittedly I do find some of the pro-choice arguments that rely on identity politics ("no uterus no opinion") to be freaking absurd, and you'd think a lesson would be learned considering one of the 6 signing off on this in fact has a uterus.

What I think is going to be very interesting is whether or not States that try to ban its citizens from going out of State to undergo what is absolutely a medical procedure find themselves violative of either the interstate or dormant commerce clause. I would say they are.

I am going to hold the "company line" here to close it out and say that Sotomayor's dissent in the football coach prayer case was completely ridiculous and would've never been written if say, a football coach in a heavily Muslim area (say the suburbs of Michigan) wanted to lead a post-game prayer of the Islamic faith. And to that end, I hope someone does, just to put to bed some of the hypotheticals I've been seeing from the worst ends of twitter today.

It neither disappoints me nor surprises me that that's your position on abortion, because I think that your position on many things is far from unreasonable. I was more interested in where you stand on those Conservative members of the Supreme Court of whom you were pretty supportive and who said all of those things that you agree with during their appointments, and have now clearly demonstrated that they were lying to Congress in order to enact a very specific political agenda.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on June 27, 2022, 05:53:13 PM
Thx for the honest answer.  Curious, I did a quick search and came up with https://wol.jw.org/en/wol/d/r1/lp-e/101990007

As for Catholics, here's one you'll like:

Q: how did Cardinal Spellman die?
A: someone slipped him a poison alterboy.

Fun for all denominations:

Q: what's the difference between a circumcision and a crucifixion?
A:  with a crucifixion they throw out the whole Jew

u.s. politics: separation of church and state (establishment clause & free exercise clause--> 1st amend)

Haha, dude I am very impressed at the research!  FTR I'd enter a Catholic church or a synagogue or a mosque before I ever set foot in another Kingdom Hall.

wol...jw....org is the only source of religious/life information approved by Witnesses . The "wol" stands for Watchtower Online Library.  It's the huge library of past Watchtowers and other various Witness books (there's a ton, as they started as a publishing company). Imagine the reverence Scientologists have for Hubbard's rants and writings...now multiply that by a hundred and you have Witnesses and Watchtower publications.

The earliest publications (and again, there's a ton) contain bat-freaking-a-monkey-excrement-insane information and prophecies. So the group only makes earlier stuff available to higher-ranking, more-indoctrinated members. I doubt there's an amazing Jesus-approved reason that all of of my uncles and aunts and MY OWN JW FATHER never want to speak to me or meet my awesome toddler son since I officially left.

(Not trying to turn this thread into my therapy session, my apologies haha....but please try not to join cults, guys)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on June 27, 2022, 06:05:50 PM


3. The level of projection in terms of "parrot" is what it is, but it also has no basis.



Fair enough, I don't know you or specific beliefs.

But please be assured there is no parroting of political ideologues or my parents, and therefore imaginary projection, on my end.
My denial to continue "parroting" is what led me to a social circle reduced by 99% and very little family. I take critical thinking and intellectual honesty that seriously. It has cost me alot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 27, 2022, 06:32:02 PM
My denial to continue "parroting" is what led me to a social circle reduced by 99% and very little family.

You know how you fix this? Come to the tailgate. Because true family is the fat men you get drunk with in a New Jersey parking lot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 27, 2022, 06:33:12 PM
I take critical thinking and intellectual honesty that seriously. It has cost me alot.

I'm very lucky (or just a judge of good character) in that the people truly close to me, the Democrats in my wedding for example, are still my very close friends.

I'd be lying if I said some longstanding "friendships" weren't destroyed from 2016-2020 but it is what it is. Similarly, I do have family members that are stupid enough to take what Cruz said about public defenders to heart and had to be set straight. Again, it is what it is.


You know how you fix this? Come to the tailgate. Because true family is the fat men you get drunk with in a New Jersey parking lot.

At least in my case, don't forget short.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 27, 2022, 06:35:15 PM
At least in my case, don't forget short.

They're not all short, and some of them aren't even that fat, although I am both, but one thing we all are is drunk and sweary. Two things. We're both those things.

Family is the short fat drunk sweary men you find along the way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 27, 2022, 08:37:47 PM
https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1541201416949211136 (https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1541201416949211136)

Video of Rudy's "assault." 

What an absolute clown.  Good thing there was video.

Guy shouldn't have patted Rudy on the back so hard.....Rudy's a bleeder..

https://giphy.com/stories/rudy-giuliani-gifs-35e0cd2e-8afb
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 27, 2022, 11:24:32 PM


Out of curiosity, has anyone seen anything that attempts to be something in the same stratosphere as objective. As to what kind of damage this whole thing is expected to do to the GOP?

At least for the next two election cycles

For a while everyone has speculated a blood bath at the midterms, and that gap has slowly narrowed.

I wonder if the left can actually end up gaining seats, and having momentum from there.

I think this may be the most unpopular GOP decision I ever see for the entirety of my life

You underestimate how many baby-brained voters will be peeled off by manufactured outrage over pronouns and cancel culture.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 27, 2022, 11:26:44 PM
Except of course when it comes to vaccine mandates.

I love how right before that widely spread passage from Thomas, there's a literal entire page dedicated to making it crystal clear that Dobbs should have no bearing in terms of substantive due process on non-abortion cases that's gone totally ignored. Too easy for the Judd Legum's of the world to spew openly racist horseshit towards the Court's most senior Black justice.

But, just to humor the gallery, re: Obergfell. Wake me up when it's overturned due to either a total lack of, or a faulty equal protection analysis (which should've been the sole lens from which the Court viewed the case to begin with as opposed to just an out that Roberts used in his admittedly horrible analysis to align with the conservative wing), otherwise this is just faux outrage that has no basis.
This is a lot of words to cover for the conservative justices simply believing the constitution's true interpretation always coincides with their personal beliefs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 27, 2022, 11:31:07 PM


(Not trying to turn this thread into my therapy session, my apologies haha....but please try not to join cults, guys)

You know how you fix this? Come to the tailgate. Because true family is the fat men you get drunk with in a New Jersey parking lot.

I know the latter was not a reply to the former but this sequence amused me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 27, 2022, 11:47:34 PM



I know the latter was not a reply to the former but this sequence amused me.


My brain had actually gone around a Jets/tailgate/cult joke, but I figured I was already pushing it in responding to Gorilla's intelligent and honest post with a tailgate plug and some throwaway humour.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 28, 2022, 09:17:44 AM

You underestimate how many baby-brained voters will be peeled off by manufactured outrage over pronouns and cancel culture.

Previously maybe.

But again this is going to be the most unpopular thing the right will ever do.

I know Newsmax watching lunatics who even are scratching their heads like what the freak.

I've seen some intelligent talking heads argue that this shouldn't have an otherworldly impact on elections simply because nothing can be done about abortion at this point.

The amount of votes you'd need to make some kind of ammendment is unrealistic, and otherwise congress can do little to nothing about state issues. So that this will simply be a state issue from here on, and the outrage will be nothing but a marketing tool.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 28, 2022, 09:24:44 AM


This is a lot of words to cover for the conservative justices simply believing the constitution's true interpretation always coincides with their personal beliefs.

I don't think anybody would argue that their personal beliefs is 1000% why they targeted this law.

But I do think the argument that the initial interpretation was pretty freaking wishy washy at best.

It's kind of mind boggling how an issue as big as abortion was essentially ignored for 50 years, despite it not having the most concrete legal standing.

Surely the left has had numerous opportunities to codify abortion, especially when they've had super majorities
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on June 28, 2022, 09:36:18 AM


My brain had actually gone around a Jets/tailgate/cult joke, but I figured I was already pushing it in responding to Gorilla's intelligent and honest post with a tailgate plug and some throwaway humour.

Hey as long as it's not a group of delusional people wearing the same mandatory colors and saying chants.

(For real, I will legit try to get there Oct 9th but it's not super-likely)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 28, 2022, 09:52:53 AM
Hey as long as it's not a group of delusional people wearing the same mandatory colors and saying chants.

Also if it helps we like to walk round the parking lot looking for groups of fans wearing the other team's colours and asking them if they'd be willing to consider letting the light of Broadway Joe and his son Zach into their life. This year we're considering warning them that failure to do so means facing the wrath of Micheal Clemons, a being of pure evil whose name is only spelled that way because his teacher didn't dare correct him in kindergarten when he wrote it down wrong.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on June 28, 2022, 10:13:30 AM
Also if it helps we like to walk round the parking lot looking for groups of fans wearing the other team's colours and asking them if they'd be willing to consider letting the light of Broadway Joe and his son Zach into their life. This year we're considering warning them that failure to do so means facing the wrath of Micheal Clemons, a being of pure evil whose name is only spelled that way because his teacher didn't dare correct him in kindergarten when he wrote it down wrong.

Excuse me sir/ma'am, do you have a second to learn about all of the good works of Curtis Martin?

It'll only take five minutes of your life to open the door to eternal salvation!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 29, 2022, 09:51:44 AM
Sec Becerra outlines Biden admin actions to ensure access to medication abortion.

 https://twitter.com/abcpolitics/status/1541806790249177088?s=21&t=Vpo9F5eFExoizby1vgcDTA (https://twitter.com/abcpolitics/status/1541806790249177088?s=21&t=Vpo9F5eFExoizby1vgcDTA)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 29, 2022, 01:00:47 PM
Haha, dude I am very impressed at the research!  FTR I'd enter a Catholic church or a synagogue or a mosque before I ever set foot in another Kingdom Hall.

wol...jw....org is the only source of religious/life information approved by Witnesses . The "wol" stands for Watchtower Online Library.  It's the huge library of past Watchtowers and other various Witness books (there's a ton, as they started as a publishing company). Imagine the reverence Scientologists have for Hubbard's rants and writings...now multiply that by a hundred and you have Witnesses and Watchtower publications.

The earliest publications (and again, there's a ton) contain bat-freaking-a-monkey-excrement-insane information and prophecies. So the group only makes earlier stuff available to higher-ranking, more-indoctrinated members. I doubt there's an amazing Jesus-approved reason that all of of my uncles and aunts and MY OWN JW FATHER never want to speak to me or meet my awesome toddler son since I officially left.

(Not trying to turn this thread into my therapy session, my apologies haha....but please try not to join cults, guys)
Awesome post.

4 honks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 29, 2022, 04:33:17 PM
Nancy Elboni
https://youtu.be/OD05oQLOm7A


CNN clinton news netwrk
https://mobile.twitter.com/ChrisCillizza/status/1541790937646612480

https://www.allsides.com/news-source/chris-cillizza-media-bias

And on the flip side, Rudy’s boy’s going to the pokey
https://www.newsobserver.com/news/business/article263026373.html





Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 29, 2022, 05:10:41 PM
The closed captioning software trying to parse Pat Cipollone had to have been the most entertaining part of Tuesday's hearing.

https://twitter.com/Merrillmarkoe/status/1541873417590165504?t=QTSUnmLGMjOuJn05p5m8CQ&s=19 (https://twitter.com/Merrillmarkoe/status/1541873417590165504?t=QTSUnmLGMjOuJn05p5m8CQ&s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 30, 2022, 11:41:15 AM
https://twitter.com/ap/status/1542466762620420097?s=21&t=_8Dj18XUoTXc8lpOL5ToEQ

I am once again begging Americans to stop electing senior citizens 20 years past retirement age as our most important leaders
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on June 30, 2022, 12:35:47 PM
https://twitter.com/wesinjapan/status/1542422747061657601?s=21&t=IQ04-rz60gqkIxeO61-YbQ
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 30, 2022, 02:34:54 PM
Maybe they want to expand affirmative action for colleges to improve diversity of thought.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 30, 2022, 03:54:19 PM
Only mildly political but Jesus Christ.

People get so anxious about climate change it's now a mental illness

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/06/30/climate-change-anxiety-is-real-expert-advice-on-what-to-do-about-it.html

Quote
Those feelings aren’t uncommon: In 2021, a global study found that 45% of people between the ages of 16 and 25 said climate anxiety was affecting their daily lives. The Climate Psychology Alliance even offers a directory of “climate-aware” therapists.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 30, 2022, 04:11:01 PM
Says the man with no children.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on June 30, 2022, 04:14:39 PM
Says the man with no children.

I can respect being passionate about the issue (I may disagree with them on the means, but it is a real issue and people need to have passion for something. So this is as good a issue as any)

But having it be a full blown mental illness causing anxiety that impacts your everyday life ? Very different
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on June 30, 2022, 06:23:28 PM
I can respect being passionate about the issue (I may disagree with them on the means, but it is a real issue and people need to have passion for something. So this is as good a issue as any)

But having it be a full blown mental illness causing anxiety that impacts your everyday life ? Very different
I'd have it if I lived at the beach or in Florida where it's getting ridiculous to insure against hurricanes. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 30, 2022, 10:24:18 PM


It's kind of mind boggling how an issue as big as abortion was essentially ignored for 50 years, despite it not having the most concrete legal standing.

Surely the left has had numerous opportunities to codify abortion, especially when they've had super majorities

If they codified it, how would they fundraise on the threat of Republicans taking that choice away?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 30, 2022, 10:30:35 PM
https://twitter.com/RudyGiuliani/status/1542690814458994689?t=y6lFD88yx2qpNAl3wFeSZQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 30, 2022, 11:23:44 PM
No backsies

https://twitter.com/RyanFaircloth/status/1542650418039345153?t=xnoLyjL6yh3gN3O-jiuURg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 01, 2022, 10:03:56 AM
I saw a few clips of that Wyoming debate with Liz Cheney.  That excrement was Idiocracy in full effect.  It was Liz and then a bunch of Trump mutants that were too dumb to think.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 01, 2022, 10:19:11 AM
Lol(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220701/1a57752cd18a397634a67f04bd8c2da7.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 01, 2022, 11:07:51 AM
https://twitter.com/UCJags/status/1540731319449272320?s=20&t=41T-cmpUJQcB12hlPxDU-Q (https://twitter.com/UCJags/status/1540731319449272320?s=20&t=41T-cmpUJQcB12hlPxDU-Q)

Too apt.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 01, 2022, 01:09:52 PM

If they codified it, how would they fundraise on the threat of Republicans taking that choice away?
I'd have it if I lived at the beach or in Florida where it's getting ridiculous to insure against hurricanes. 
Sounds like you're caught 'tween row v. wave

I'll let myself out...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 01, 2022, 02:46:12 PM
I'd have it if I lived at the beach or in Florida where it's getting ridiculous to insure against hurricanes. 

You might not make it but your kids are probably going to see the last polar bear die.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 01, 2022, 02:49:19 PM
Someone tell me if this is as bad as it seems.

(https://i.imgur.com/kPajLnB.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 01, 2022, 02:54:26 PM
Someone tell me if this is as bad as it seems.

(https://i.imgur.com/kPajLnB.png)

It's really bad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 01, 2022, 08:12:38 PM
It's really bad.

Yeah but Biden fell off his bike
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 02, 2022, 12:03:21 AM
Yeah but Biden fell off his bike
https://twitter.com/imillhiser/status/1542933077382545409?t=mKqFvaR0ZgGx_zrHdQ874g&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 02, 2022, 10:56:05 AM
Normal country

https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1543031483971108866?t=0IQHWFBj8XOI0zqspGQO1A&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 02, 2022, 11:41:07 AM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fe/End_of_the_World.jpg/320px-End_of_the_World.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a4/Complaint_Department_Grenade.jpg/195px-Complaint_Department_Grenade.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a6/Complaints_take_a_number.jpg/292px-Complaints_take_a_number.jpg)


There isn't a problem in the world that can't be fixed...

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Trehjuling_Horndals_bruk_01.jpg/320px-Trehjuling_Horndals_bruk_01.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c1/Damaged%28yetChained%29RedTrike.jpg/320px-Damaged%28yetChained%29RedTrike.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/P20210805AS-1358_%2851566701579%29.jpg/320px-P20210805AS-1358_%2851566701579%29.jpg)





(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a1/Relaxing_at_the_beach.jpg/320px-Relaxing_at_the_beach.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c2/Relaxing_in_the_hammock_by_the_sea_near_Almedalen.jpg/320px-Relaxing_in_the_hammock_by_the_sea_near_Almedalen.jpg)
It seems like all the world is fighting
They're even talking of a war
Let all the Russians and the Chinese
And the Spanish do their fighting
The sun is shining
We're going drivin', drivin'
Drop all your work
Leave it behind
Forget all your problems
And get in my car
And take a drive with me
The sandwiches are packed
The tea is in the flask
We've plenty of beer
And gooseberry tarts
So take a drive with me
We'll take your mother if you want to
We'll have a picnic on the grass
Forget your nephews
And your cousins and your brothers and your sisters
They'll never miss us
'Cos we'll be drivin', drivin'. drivin'. drivin'
Thousands of trees
Hundreds of fields
Millions of birds
So why don't you come
And take a drive with me
We'll talk to the cows
And laugh at the sheep
We'll lie in a field
And we'll have a sleep
So take a drive with me
And all the troubled world around us
Seems an eternity away
And all the debt collectors
Rent collectors
All will be behind us
But they'll never find us
'Cos we'll be drivin', drivin', drivin', drivin'
Passed Barnet Church
Up to Potters Bar
We won't be home late
It's not very far
So take a drive with me, take a drive with me
Drivin', drivin', drivin', drivin'
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 02, 2022, 12:26:47 PM
Girl power!

https://twitter.com/GoodPoliticGuy/status/1543234924412633089?t=0hQpCFkMinO6lKe0nr--CA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 02, 2022, 12:59:44 PM
Normal country

https://twitter.com/StevenTDennis/status/1543031483971108866?t=0IQHWFBj8XOI0zqspGQO1A&s=19
"Well maybe if abortion advocates were less annoying we wouldn't force a 10 year old to carry a rape pregnancy"

https://twitter.com/libbyemmons/status/1543200559242641408?t=oRyR3wjDyD7FFsJ4HLFH3w&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 02, 2022, 03:05:06 PM
https://twitter.com/imillhiser/status/1542933077382545409?t=mKqFvaR0ZgGx_zrHdQ874g&s=19

Ial LOLheiser. Master of hyperbole if not flat out lying.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 03, 2022, 08:40:11 AM
Ial LOLheiser. Master of hyperbole if not flat out lying.

Vox = ordained truth.   

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/56/VOX_AC30_Twin.jpg/320px-VOX_AC30_Twin.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/37/Truth%21.jpg/320px-Truth%21.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 03, 2022, 10:34:21 AM
Ial LOLheiser. Master of hyperbole if not flat out lying.
Except this is true, but ok.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 04, 2022, 05:00:00 PM
As dumb as they think AOC is

https://twitter.com/santiagomayer_/status/1543983844059222017?t=Bd8pi6gofwqB2VBya1xVqw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 05, 2022, 07:58:07 AM
Philly mayor seems burned out

https://twitter.com/KeeleyFox29/status/1544199344672358401?t=jn1s1gZWKAGkFcxH4RIiUA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 05, 2022, 08:00:17 AM
Philly mayor seems burned out

https://twitter.com/KeeleyFox29/status/1544199344672358401?t=jn1s1gZWKAGkFcxH4RIiUA&s=19

That was kind of difficult to watch.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 05, 2022, 08:01:17 AM
That was kind of difficult to watch.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220705/0480cc018d93d06861d96fa72c0b298c.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 05, 2022, 05:24:37 PM
Jim Kenney's a megapussy.....and take that dumb fuckin Emirates teeshirt off already and wear some Eagles/Sixers swag ya slob...

Probably to be replaced by an even more fork-tongued, hyper-partisan stooge

https://twitter.com/toocrued1/status/1544272164395827202

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 06, 2022, 06:10:52 AM
Imagine being this much of a stupid poopchute.

Quote
For over a year, lawmakers and businesses have been bemoaning how they can't find workers.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell offered his own theory as to why at an event in Paducah, Kentucky, on Tuesday. 

"You've got a whole lot of people sitting on the sidelines because, frankly, they're flush for the moment," the Kentucky Republican said. "What we've got to hope is once they run out of money, they'll start concluding it's better to work than not to work."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on July 06, 2022, 02:45:23 PM
On to important issues...

https://spectatorworld.com/life/nancy-pelosi-italy-swimsuit-vacation/

(https://3tu97y2w9w35k69i31phftc4-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/nancep-730x475.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 06, 2022, 03:06:17 PM

(https://3tu97y2w9w35k69i31phftc4-wpengine.netdna-ssl.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/nancep-730x475.png)
(https://media.giphy.com/media/BofJb4WxJnz7jFfxeD/giphy.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on July 06, 2022, 05:02:59 PM
Imagine being this much of a stupid poopchute.


I certainly don't think most of these people are flush.

But they do seem content not working, so presumably they have some level of satisfaction with their finances
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 07, 2022, 02:19:18 PM
I certainly don't think most of these people are flush.

But they do seem content not working, so presumably they have some level of satisfaction with their finances
I think there are more people who were service industry workers who died, or who have young kids and determined childcare costs too much to justify going back to work, than there are people who are somehow still living off their stimulus checks and unemployment benefits (which nearly everyone was cut off of after September).

Considering how often some people like to use automation as a threat against asking for higher wages, you'd think these places would be doing it en masse - now's the time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 07, 2022, 08:43:13 PM
https://twitter.com/ProfMMurray/status/1544881295758467072?t=UtuNEvxmRSUPybN4izVSxA&s=19 (https://twitter.com/ProfMMurray/status/1544881295758467072?t=UtuNEvxmRSUPybN4izVSxA&s=19)

Yeah that's fucked up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 07, 2022, 11:47:54 PM
This seems pretty awesome.

https://kion546.com/news/2022/07/07/governor-gavin-newsom-announces-california-will-make-its-own-insulin/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 08, 2022, 07:31:27 AM
But why wouldn’t she support voting rights?

 https://twitter.com/aterkel/status/1545130707776839680?s=21&t=pwqDfoAyu_TZIiEadQ4_RQ (https://twitter.com/aterkel/status/1545130707776839680?s=21&t=pwqDfoAyu_TZIiEadQ4_RQ)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 08, 2022, 09:20:50 PM
*two weeks plus a one month warning

https://twitter.com/BMarchetich/status/1545407560458584064?t=sIGXCE2PN21oLAu0sXP0QA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 09, 2022, 05:48:10 AM
Just woke up....turned on CSPAN-2 ("Book TV").....am currently watching/listening to Donna Brazile (D) interviewing Kellyanne Conway (R) ...fwiw, interesting to hear people listening/engaging ....even when disagreeing....






Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 09, 2022, 08:35:05 AM
Just woke up....turned on CSPAN-2 ("Book TV").....am currently watching/listening to Donna Brazile (D) interviewing Kellyanne Conway (R) ...fwiw, interesting to hear people listening/engaging ....even when disagreeing....
Interesting like watching a pair of malnourished cripples armwrestling. They're both awful individuals.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 10, 2022, 01:58:55 PM
Interesting like watching a pair of malnourished cripples armwrestling. They're both awful individuals.




Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 10, 2022, 01:59:26 PM
^ You’re right, I should’ve flipped the dial and not listened to what either of them had to say (especially in keeping with the JO tenet of decisiveness and polarization when it comes to ‘politics’.     yawn




Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 10, 2022, 04:08:35 PM
If you feel like you learned something of value from either of those fucknuggets then I'm all ears.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 10, 2022, 08:23:05 PM
If you feel like you learned something of value from either of those fucknuggets then I'm all ears.
Donna had a fleeting moment of usefulness when she aired some of the dirty laundry of 2016.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 10, 2022, 09:39:40 PM
https://twitter.com/Marcissist/status/1545783372164775939?t=5hjYQSMVHO9TUjzHPkf_8w&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 10, 2022, 11:14:20 PM
https://twitter.com/Marcissist/status/1545783372164775939?t=5hjYQSMVHO9TUjzHPkf_8w&s=19

Cannot retrieve Tweet at this time. Please try again later.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 11, 2022, 12:03:50 AM
Donna had a fleeting moment of usefulness when she aired some of the dirty laundry of 2016.
Was that when she did her cameo in Billions? I'll give you that, it was funny to watch her further debase herself.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 11, 2022, 08:24:00 AM
If you feel like you learned something of value from either of those fucknuggets then I'm all ears.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/Big_Ears_Sitting.jpg/213px-Big_Ears_Sitting.jpg)

Sure did.

Brazille: Hillary/Bernie/DNC/Robbie Mook—details on how the DNC freaked over Bernie.  Conway: must introspection, personal reflections.   Progress or at least compromise can only come about by listening to gain a clearer understanding of where someone’s coming from even when you totally disagree with them.  I’m flipping the dial…I stopped, paused, and listened to what they had to say and then moved on.  I’m not going to ‘close it down’ because I personally thought they’re fucknuggets.  That’s Kancel Kulture Klub thinking imho…
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 11, 2022, 08:32:38 AM
That’s Kancel Kulture Klub thinking imho…

Choosing not to spend any time or effort listening to two people who have offered exactly nothing of value in their lives so far is not cancel culture, it's exercising basic critical faculties. They can spout off all they like, Brazile about her own self importance and Conway about whatever gibberish someone else has placed into her head, but I'm not interested in hearing about it.

It's funny that you're trying to pin that as "the JO tenet of decisiveness and polarization when it comes to ‘politics’" when they're coming from completely opposing sides of the aisle (ostensibly at least).

(BTW, I have a couple of times recently heard the phrase "cancel culture" rebranded as "consequence culture". I like that a lot more.)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 11, 2022, 08:50:31 AM
Cannot retrieve Tweet at this time. Please try again later.
Someone screenshot 3 column headlines by Kathleen Parker, with the first 2 downplaying future political consequences and the 3rd asking how we did not see this coming.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 11, 2022, 08:55:40 AM
Choosing not to spend any time or effort listening to

two people who have offered exactly nothing of value in their lives

 so far is not cancel culture, it's exercising basic critical faculties. They can spout off all they like, Brazile about her own self importance and Conway about whatever gibberish someone else has placed into her head, but I'm not interested in hearing about it.

It's funny that you're trying to pin that as "the JO tenet of decisiveness and polarization when it comes to ‘politics’" when they're coming from completely opposing sides of the aisle (ostensibly at least).

(BTW, I have a couple of times recently heard the phrase "cancel culture" rebranded as "consequence culture". I like that a lot more.)
(in bold) translation: I’m a better, morally superior person.  Whatever…

The JO tenet: while we probably ‘agree on things’ 90+% of the time there is a group speak vibe in which contrarian viewpoints are met with a breaking eggshells with sledgehammers’ chorus, i.e. piling on…
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 11, 2022, 09:02:38 AM
(in bold) translation: I’m a better, morally superior person.  Whatever…

The JO tenet: while we probably ‘agree on things’ 90+% of the time there is a group speak vibe in which contrarian viewpoints are met with a breaking eggshells with sledgehammers’ chorus, i.e. piling on…

It's weird how you keep projecting things that you wish were being said rather than what is actually being said.

I'm not claiming to be better, morally superior person to Brazile or Conway (although in my favour I have never played any kind of significant role in causing undue suffering and damage to the lives of millions of people through a combination of personal ambition, stupidity and hubris, so if I were to be making that claim I think I'd have some fairly solid ground upon which to make it), I'm saying that neither of them has any opinion or thinking to which I would attach any value given their respective track records.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 11, 2022, 01:51:24 PM
 https://twitter.com/mplskerrbear/status/1546502272112263168?s=21&t=-HiDrh0HdYNpWY18hHdAkw (https://twitter.com/mplskerrbear/status/1546502272112263168?s=21&t=-HiDrh0HdYNpWY18hHdAkw)

Wat?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 12, 2022, 10:35:07 AM
https://twitter.com/american_bridge/status/1546553453115318272?s=21&t=srz5tZwEj9vixhGhZWooSA

When the tie matches the person
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 12, 2022, 11:30:34 AM
https://twitter.com/american_bridge/status/1546553453115318272?s=21&t=srz5tZwEj9vixhGhZWooSA

When the tie matches the person

He seems like an awful dude.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 12, 2022, 02:29:33 PM
It's weird how you keep projecting things that you wish were being said rather than what is actually being said.

I'm not claiming to be better, morally superior person to Brazile or Conway (although in my favour I have never played any kind of significant role in causing undue suffering and damage to the lives of millions of people through a combination of personal ambition, stupidity and hubris, so if I were to be making that claim I think I'd have some fairly solid ground upon which to make it), I'm saying that neither of them has any opinion or thinking to which I would attach any value given their respective track records.

It's not weird, it's self-centered sophistry - deal with it.  : )

So, in other words you are better..  ; )    Conway by dint of Trump ok, but what exactly did Brazille do to cause the shedding of tears and washing of teeth among millions?   
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 12, 2022, 04:41:48 PM
It's not weird, it's self-centered sophistry - deal with it.  : )

So, in other words you are better..  ; )    Conway by dint of Trump ok, but what exactly did Brazille do to cause the shedding of tears and washing of teeth among millions?   

She is the worst kind of cynical political operative, devoid of principles, and duplicitous as a matter of daily function. And she wasn't even good enough at that when it mattered, she got outplayed by Trump's Russian handlers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 12, 2022, 05:21:22 PM
https://twitter.com/justinbaragona/status/1546955197045415936?t=1eeqDjKC22t1W7aqoo5qfQ&s=19 (https://twitter.com/justinbaragona/status/1546955197045415936?t=1eeqDjKC22t1W7aqoo5qfQ&s=19)

Yeah Bolton belongs in prison.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 12, 2022, 05:46:21 PM
You have to scroll down a bit to see a picture of the girl the story is about, but once you do the jokes write themselves.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-61973510
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 13, 2022, 12:48:24 PM
All in all this has been a high effort grift

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220713/22e3953a993ef73a4f56b4cf8bf7cf7b.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 13, 2022, 07:17:53 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/13/us/ohio-arrest-rape-abortion.html

In the above story's text you can focus on information regarding the story's headline or the story's subheading or the afterthought fact that the monster who raped the child shouldn't have been in the U.S. in the first place.


http://www.fcmcclerk.com/storage/shared/daily-arraignment/FCMC%20Arraignment%20Report%204D%202022-07-13%20Defendant%20Sheets.pdf?694685

^ CHARGES:
#1 M1 2919.25(A) DOMESTIC VIOLENCE - KNOWINGLY CAUSE PHYSICAL HARM
#2 M1 2903.13(A)< ASSAULT

what happened to the charge of rape?

https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-2907.02


 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 14, 2022, 10:33:01 AM
https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/13/us/ohio-arrest-rape-abortion.html

In the above story's text you can focus on information regarding the story's headline or the story's subheading or the afterthought fact that the monster who raped the child shouldn't have been in the U.S. in the first place.


http://www.fcmcclerk.com/storage/shared/daily-arraignment/FCMC%20Arraignment%20Report%204D%202022-07-13%20Defendant%20Sheets.pdf?694685

^ CHARGES:
#1 M1 2919.25(A) DOMESTIC VIOLENCE - KNOWINGLY CAUSE PHYSICAL HARM
#2 M1 2903.13(A)< ASSAULT

what happened to the charge of rape?

https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-2907.02


 


Yes, because only undocumented immigrants rape people here in the good ol U S of A

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 14, 2022, 02:09:48 PM
Quote from: delavan
but what exactly did Brazille do to cause the shedding of tears and washing of teeth among millions?
Quote from: Johnny Emglish
She is the worst kind of cynical political operative, devoid of principles, and duplicitous as a matter of daily function. And she wasn't even good enough at that when it mattered, she got outplayed by Trump's Russian handlers.
All well and good but I asked 'exactly what did Brazille do?' and in turn got a "she's a blinkity-blank this and that" harangue.  Nvermnd, not important.


Yes, because only undocumented immigrants rape people here in the good ol U S of A
Nice project/deflect.  So that's who this child-raping monster is, the venial, politically de rigueur 'undocumented immigrant?"    Such generosity of spirit, such benevolence.  So mums's the word on this scumbag's immigration status because it offends your personal sensibilities?  Got it.  And while we're projecting/deflecting I'll shut the freak up about the countless left alone kids being abused en route to  'points north' of the Rio Grande...or the fentanyl streaming over the border...or is mum's the word on that too?  Sorry, calling a spade a spade..
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 14, 2022, 02:15:07 PM
The callipygian congresswoman looking muy caliente in that form-fitting dress.  This is shlt stuttering john from the howard stern show used to do..

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1547394039468752914
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 14, 2022, 05:44:35 PM
It's cancel culture gone mad!

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/14/us/politics/lauren-boebert-restaurant-shooters-grill-closed.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 14, 2022, 07:14:30 PM
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1547728086153564160?t=AhtwoJwlpQ_-DBLO4BFWWw&s=19 (https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1547728086153564160?t=AhtwoJwlpQ_-DBLO4BFWWw&s=19)

So is it a state's issue or...?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 14, 2022, 09:37:00 PM
Yes, because only undocumented immigrants rape people here in the good ol U S of A

"Who cares if boarder enforcement would demonstratively lead to less crime, people here do bad stuff too!'
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 14, 2022, 09:56:18 PM
"Who cares if boarder enforcement would demonstratively lead to less crime, people here do bad stuff too!'
*border

Unless you live on a ship.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 15, 2022, 08:17:50 AM
"Who cares if boarder enforcement would demonstratively lead to less crime, people here do bad stuff too!'


I can’t believe Donnie’s wall didn’t work
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 15, 2022, 08:23:29 AM
I can’t believe Donnie’s wall didn’t work

You mean the wall that never got built because of constant ObStRUcTiOn as it would be categorized if he had a (D) next to his name?

You're just fully of shitty deflections that are easily dismissed over the last 48 hours.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 15, 2022, 04:44:41 PM
It's cancel culture gone mad!

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/07/14/us/politics/lauren-boebert-restaurant-shooters-grill-closed.html
  n/a

This just in: that toucan-faced Shock-G lookalike is a repulsive pos.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 15, 2022, 09:09:12 PM
You mean the wall that never got built because of constant ObStRUcTiOn as it would be categorized if he had a (D) next to his name?

You're just fully of shitty deflections that are easily dismissed over the last 48 hours.

Hilarious. You’re the one deflecting from the actual conversation at hand.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 15, 2022, 09:30:19 PM
https://twitter.com/wave3news/status/1548115221033541635?t=WQ-DCaNhplDtdGlGwkj6Fw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 18, 2022, 03:46:20 PM
The cow mooeth...
https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1549063498793189376

Paulie Big Tlts, such a savvy investor...
https://dailycaller.com/2022/07/15/pelosis-husband-massive-amount-in-chips-stock-before-expected-senate-vote-subsidies/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 18, 2022, 04:25:20 PM
MAGA

https://twitter.com/Newsweek/status/1549058957552979968?t=IEAJ5FZh5N-L0aJ4cVvH2w&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 19, 2022, 07:24:06 PM
157 Republicans voted against codifying gay marriage equality today but I'm sure they're never coming after Ogberfell.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 19, 2022, 08:19:33 PM
157 Republicans voted against codifying gay marriage equality today but I'm sure they're never coming after Ogberfell.

Bottom line: the bill passed

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/19/house-republicans-same-sex-marriage-law-00046682
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 19, 2022, 08:43:26 PM
The 'ignominy' of being led away in handcuffs......

https://twitter.com/FreeBeacon/status/1549448414072643585

question:  why the coat in 90 plus degree weather?
bonus question: what song was being butchered in the background?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 19, 2022, 08:45:09 PM
Because when you're trying to act like you're in handcuffs you totally lift one arm above your head.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 19, 2022, 09:35:06 PM
Bottom line: the bill passed

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/19/house-republicans-same-sex-marriage-law-00046682
Still got the Senate to go though, no?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 19, 2022, 10:10:31 PM
Still got the Senate to go though, no?

Correct
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 20, 2022, 11:55:10 AM
Still got the Senate to go though, no?
Joe Manchin might need to delay it for a few months while he considers the impact gay marriage might have on the deficit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 20, 2022, 02:35:57 PM
Because when you're trying to act like you're in handcuffs you totally lift one arm above your head.
Cute but the raised fist salute (attention: John Carlos and Tommy Smith) was after the phony handcuff theatrics.  Better yet was the similar Ilhan Omar ‘in handcuffs’ stunt where she didn’t even wait for the cop but walked ahead of him—hands bound—lame derriere theatrics.  So if the same disingenuous antics were pulled by some posturing GOP idiot you’d be just as quick with the raised fist sarcasm I’m sure.   No comment on the coat in 90 plus weather?…or the song?.. or we just cherrypicking?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 20, 2022, 02:41:12 PM
Astounding that people still fall for the grift of that absolute horse-faced jackass.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 20, 2022, 04:51:04 PM
Astounding that people still fall for the grift of that absolute horse-faced jackass.
Look, I don't want to belabor the point.  Row v. Wade's been on the books for half a century.  Why the SCOTUS felt compelled to chew the same steak a 2nd time 50 years later is beyond me.   And granting full, legal status in perpetuity to same-sex unions should be a no brainer.

My point was/is: check out the other 'busted' NY Rep. (Carolyn Maloney, the blonde) in the link below and compare her to the smirking  "look-at-me!" faux-posturing lightweight behind her vvv:

https://maloney.house.gov/media-center/press-releases/congresswoman-maloney-arrested-protesting-supreme-court-decision

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 20, 2022, 10:25:51 PM
Bottom line: the bill passed

https://www.politico.com/news/2022/07/19/house-republicans-same-sex-marriage-law-00046682

Actual Bottom line: Republicans have no reason to vote against this other than to toe the line as hateful bigots.

Open for counterarguments.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 20, 2022, 11:36:44 PM
Cute but the raised fist salute (attention: John Carlos and Tommy Smith) was after the phony handcuff theatrics.  Better yet was the similar Ilhan Omar ‘in handcuffs’ stunt where she didn’t even wait for the cop but walked ahead of him—hands bound—lame derriere theatrics.  So if the same disingenuous antics were pulled by some posturing GOP idiot you’d be just as quick with the raised fist sarcasm I’m sure.   No comment on the coat in 90 plus weather?…or the song?.. or we just cherrypicking?

I'll stick with the one point. From the horse's mouth:

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1549809724513722374?s=20&t=AlknLBn1bYuMVT_kBBMPDw (https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1549809724513722374?s=20&t=AlknLBn1bYuMVT_kBBMPDw)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 21, 2022, 08:55:14 AM
LMAO, the Secret Service did what everyone accused Hillary of.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 21, 2022, 09:57:12 AM
LMAO, the Secret Service did what everyone accused Hillary of.
Ritualistic cannibalism of babies?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 21, 2022, 10:29:31 AM
Ritualistic cannibalism of babies?

They left the gate open at Benghazi.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 21, 2022, 11:50:32 AM
Actual Bottom line: Republicans have no reason to vote against this other than to toe the line as hateful bigots.

Open for counterarguments.
Respectfully, the actual bottom line is whether a bill passes or not, and fortunately it did.  Hateful bigots?  No doubt; a shitload of 'em I'm sure.  But, one hundred percent across-the-board?  No, and that was my point, i.e. that instead of painting a targeted group as 100% across-the-board intolerant bigots,  noting instead that 47 of them (among their bigoted ranks) wisely voted in support of the bill....see I'm a glass-half-full optimist type (albeit glass one-third full here).   

I'll stick with the one point. From the horse's mouth:

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1549809724513722374?s=20&t=AlknLBn1bYuMVT_kBBMPDw (https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1549809724513722374?s=20&t=AlknLBn1bYuMVT_kBBMPDw)
Cato, as she claimed in her tweet ("putting your hands behind your back is a best practice while detained, handcuffed or not"), that is the LAST thing you'd want to do.  Instead you'd want to show a cop your hands at all times.  This was 'check-ME-out' theatrics.   
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 21, 2022, 02:33:07 PM
From the horse's mouth:

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1549809724513722374?s=20&t=AlknLBn1bYuMVT_kBBMPDw (https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1549809724513722374?s=20&t=AlknLBn1bYuMVT_kBBMPDw)

Bolded for truth!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 21, 2022, 02:40:31 PM
https://twitter.com/billpascrell/status/1550146164217061377?s=21&t=-9BQy6a038csq9fhEZh1Ig

I feel like I’m living in 1920
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 21, 2022, 02:55:26 PM
https://twitter.com/billpascrell/status/1550146164217061377?s=21&t=-9BQy6a038csq9fhEZh1Ig

I feel like I’m living in 1920

Who is voting for these people? Who is looking at someone who votes to make contraception illegal and thinks "yup, that's the guy for me"? What kind of twisted freaking world do these people live in?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 21, 2022, 03:46:47 PM
I don't get it.  Banning contraception while (presumably) supporting the Supreme Court about face on Row v. Wade makes absolutely no sense.   

Would've had to stock up on ol' reliable spermicidal coca-cola: https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn14864-coca-cola-douches-scoop-ig-nobel-prize/ 

"I'd like to teach the world to douche..."

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fc/Coca_cola_bottles.JPG/640px-Coca_cola_bottles.JPG)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 21, 2022, 03:59:40 PM
When they say banning contraception, are they exclusively talking about prophylactic medication or do they want to go the whole hog and ban physical media like condoms and IUDs as well? Because if it's the latter then I'm very much a fan of the idea, the opportunity to run a business smuggling rubbers over the border is too great to be ignored.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 21, 2022, 04:04:03 PM
When they say banning contraception, are they exclusively talking about prophylactic medication or do they want to go the whole hog and ban physical media like condoms and IUDs as well? Because if it's the latter then I'm very much a fan of the idea, the opportunity to run a business smuggling rubbers over the border is too great to be ignored.

Anti-contraception yet pro-phylactic? 

#scumbag    
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 21, 2022, 04:07:03 PM
Anti-contraception yet pro-phylactic? 

#scumbag    

Hey, a lot of the most lucrative businesses are just cashing in on other people's stupidity. Don't deny me my chance of wealth.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 21, 2022, 04:25:13 PM
Hey, a lot of the most lucrative businesses are just cashing in on other people's stupidity. Don't deny me my chance of wealth.
There's a sucker born every minute.  Matter of fact, if there only were more 'suckers' there wouldn't be as many suckers born.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 21, 2022, 04:29:06 PM
Bolded for truth!
You'd ride that filly - nice fundaments 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 21, 2022, 05:08:46 PM
The 'ignominy' of being led away in handcuffs......

https://twitter.com/FreeBeacon/status/1549448414072643585

question:  why the coat in 90 plus degree weather?
bonus question: what song was being butchered in the background?
Time's up tin-eared philistines..

answer: unless you're Big Shaq (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3M_5oYU-IsU) there was no reason  
answer: "I'll Be There" - Jackson 5
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on July 21, 2022, 06:32:41 PM
oof was that really "I'll be there"?

If so, that was beyond butchered, yikes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 21, 2022, 08:07:27 PM
https://twitter.com/vivian/status/1550284982391918593?s=21&t=Fwb-cOado7ICzi6c6kDb7Q (https://twitter.com/vivian/status/1550284982391918593?s=21&t=Fwb-cOado7ICzi6c6kDb7Q)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 21, 2022, 08:52:31 PM
 https://twitter.com/the_mal_gallery/status/1550289866411634689?s=21&t=A_zx1q0KZKdr60W_KXmHRQ (https://twitter.com/the_mal_gallery/status/1550289866411634689?s=21&t=A_zx1q0KZKdr60W_KXmHRQ)

See Josh run.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 22, 2022, 07:51:43 AM
I've absolutely seen bail used as a way to indefinitely detain people and force them to eat criminal charges they'd otherwise fight so I'm not saying some sort of reform wasn't absolutely necessary (and discovery reform was completely necessary, but that hasn't stopped my trusted and above board local DA's office from trying to circumvent that as well by conditioning what they'll offer on whether we waive said speedy discovery)...

But the fact that the guy that tried to freaking STAB Zeldin was out literally within hours on his own recognizance is insane.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 22, 2022, 10:35:13 AM
oof was that really "I'll be there"?

If so, that was beyond butchered, yikes.
Yup.....they're playing (badly) the melody to the lyrics "just call my naaame.....I'll be there..."   

The musical term to indicate slowing down the tempo at song's end is called ritardando or retardando in this case.  It sounded like the last gasps of a deflated balloon (think: Salvation Army Band + quaaludes).......slowly plodding to the finish line...crash...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 22, 2022, 02:05:16 PM
https://twitter.com/AP/status/1550554946877243397?t=odn2oKocAqmiWWBqwwQz1g&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 22, 2022, 03:34:18 PM
https://twitter.com/AP/status/1550554946877243397?t=odn2oKocAqmiWWBqwwQz1g&s=19
Bannon appeared today looking like he used a comb on his hair for once - what contempt?   ; )

In other news, NY gubernatorial candidate Lee Zeldin gets stage rushed by some nut brandishing a weapon of sorts......attacker's rag-dolled to the ground and arrested on felony assault charges......but there's a happy ending to this:  the attacker's now back out on the street just hours later having been released on his own recognizance.

MB:  yer darn-tootin' "some country" we got here 
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/30/12-08_Wacken_Sculpture.jpg/160px-12-08_Wacken_Sculpture.jpg)

Canada?   ..you wish..
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 22, 2022, 04:47:46 PM


In other news, NY gubernatorial candidate Lee Zeldin gets stage rushed by some nut brandishing a weapon of sorts......attacker's rag-dolled to the ground and arrested on felony assault charges......but there's a happy ending to this:  the attacker's now back out on the street just hours later having been released on his own recognizance.

MB:  yer darn-tootin' "some country" we got here 
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/30/12-08_Wacken_Sculpture.jpg/160px-12-08_Wacken_Sculpture.jpg)

Canada?   ..you wish..

See my comment above. It's absolutely insane to the point that the cynical part of me is worried that this might have been staged. It's just too perfect.

Even if it was, it still drives the point home that bail reform in the State (again, something that was necessary to a certain extent) has gone way, wayyyy too far.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 22, 2022, 05:17:31 PM
See my comment above. It's absolutely insane to the point that the cynical part of me is worried that this might have been staged. It's just too perfect.

Even if it was, it still drives the point home that bail reform in the State (again, something that was necessary to a certain extent) has gone way, wayyyy too far.

Try this on for size: you're in a gas station holding an infant.  A guy comes in and points a gun at your head.  (pix link below)

Fast forward: you don't show up at the hearing?....all charges are dismissed against the guy who pointed a gun at your head.

https://www.fox2detroit.com/news/charges-dismissed-against-man-accused-of-pointing-gun-at-dad-carrying-baby-at-detroit-gas-station
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 23, 2022, 10:49:16 AM
https://twitter.com/davenewworld_2/status/1550823673296207873?t=NBCa7xQ-yKIGkhx3jpZ2kg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 23, 2022, 10:50:42 AM


See my comment above. It's absolutely insane to the point that the cynical part of me is worried that this might have been staged. It's just too perfect.

Even if it was, it still drives the point home that bail reform in the State (again, something that was necessary to a certain extent) has gone way, wayyyy too far.

Funny you should mention that

https://twitter.com/ScottHech/status/1550673702466887680?t=mbIw_Ixyn30sVZ5TxMl0Kw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 23, 2022, 04:16:01 PM
Absolute clown

(https://i.redd.it/79e5w74xt3d91.png)

AND SPOUSES
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 23, 2022, 04:18:42 PM
Absolute clown

(https://i.redd.it/79e5w74xt3d91.png)

AND SPOUSES

They'll need the combat skills to survive the next shooting.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 23, 2022, 05:53:17 PM
I'm really curious to know what kind of America he wants to build. I come from a military family, I like veterans. If I owned a business I would employ the freak out of vets.

I don't understand the logic of trying to make them teachers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 23, 2022, 06:24:24 PM
I'm really curious to know what kind of America he wants to build. I come from a military family, I like veterans. If I owned a business I would employ the freak out of vets.

I don't understand the logic of trying to make them teachers.

The least cynical reading that I can come up with is to give recently retired/separated veterans or their spouses (of which there are likely a large amount in Florida) a chance to immediately get into the workforce rather than having to attend grad school first to obtain a teaching certificate. A lot of vets, just due to the nature of their training, are pretty much one teaching certificate away from qualifying as physical education teachers.

Reading between the lines, the recent Don't Say Gay legislation and state level meddling and restrictions on curriculum could have convinced a not insignificant amount of teachers already combating low pay, intrusive parents, long hours, and having to pay for many of their own classroom supplies that the field is just not worth it anymore and this provides the state with a new source to fill in the gaps.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 25, 2022, 09:47:26 AM
I'm really curious to know what kind of America he wants to build. I come from a military family, I like veterans. If I owned a business I would employ the freak out of vets.

I don't understand the logic of trying to make them teachers.
It makes perfect sense if you're trying to destroy public schools.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 25, 2022, 09:47:41 AM
Kansas, what is you doin

https://twitter.com/JamesThompsonKS/status/1550516254011789313?t=o4t6QXMtV2wNztZhxxS-0A&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 25, 2022, 09:53:09 AM
It makes perfect sense if you're trying to destroy public schools.

I presume it's also tied to the gun lobby's obsession with arming teachers, to try and counter the whole "it's not fair to ask teachers to be firearms experts" argument their twisted logic is simply to make firearms experts teachers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 25, 2022, 11:20:24 AM

Funny you should mention that

https://twitter.com/ScottHech/status/1550673702466887680?t=mbIw_Ixyn30sVZ5TxMl0Kw&s=19


As much as I do agree that the circumstances behind this are shady, if there's one singular person who's opinions I'm willing to totally forgo when it comes to bail reform, its Scott.

Nice enough guy actually (though I hid my political leanings well when undertaking the clinic at BDS), decent enough attorney, but completely and utterly compromised by his ideology to look at bail reform with a modicum of common sense.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 25, 2022, 11:22:18 AM
Don't Say Gay legislation

Such regurgitations of easily debunkable labels disseminated by a media who sees Ronny D coming and is excrement scared of their precious failing worldview being repudiated are not to be taken seriously.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 25, 2022, 01:46:01 PM
Such regurgitations of easily debunkable labels disseminated by a media who sees Ronny D coming and is excrement scared of their precious failing worldview being repudiated are not to be taken seriously.

I liked the 'intrusive parents' part.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 25, 2022, 02:16:24 PM
I liked the 'intrusive parents' part.



Let me rephrase: Parents that openly threaten their kids' teachers and school boards.

https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/27/school-boards-covid-restrictions-violence-517326 (https://www.politico.com/news/2021/10/27/school-boards-covid-restrictions-violence-517326)
https://floridaphoenix.com/2021/10/25/fl-school-board-members-recount-threatening-texts-vandalism-and-other-harassment/ (https://floridaphoenix.com/2021/10/25/fl-school-board-members-recount-threatening-texts-vandalism-and-other-harassment/)
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/05/us/politics/school-board-threats.html (https://www.nytimes.com/2021/11/05/us/politics/school-board-threats.html)
https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-addresses-violent-threats-against-school-officials-and-teachers (https://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/justice-department-addresses-violent-threats-against-school-officials-and-teachers)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 25, 2022, 03:36:22 PM
https://twitter.com/momsagabbott/status/1551522653705576449?s=21&t=uPIciKNpv_JWp03mR46MhQ
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 25, 2022, 04:00:07 PM
 https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/w7q34p/joe_manchin_tests_positive_for_covid19/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf (https://www.reddit.com/r/politics/comments/w7q34p/joe_manchin_tests_positive_for_covid19/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=iossmf)

Manchin tests positive.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 25, 2022, 06:03:44 PM

As much as I do agree that the circumstances behind this are shady, if there's one singular person who's opinions I'm willing to totally forgo when it comes to bail reform, its Scott.

Nice enough guy actually (though I hid my political leanings well when undertaking the clinic at BDS), decent enough attorney, but completely and utterly compromised by his ideology to look at bail reform with a modicum of common sense.
He's definitely not an objective reporter here but the actual facts involved do paint a convincing picture.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 25, 2022, 08:29:27 PM
Respectfully, the actual bottom line is whether a bill passes or not, and fortunately it did.  Hateful bigots?  No doubt; a shitload of 'em I'm sure.  But, one hundred percent across-the-board?  No, and that was my point, i.e. that instead of painting a targeted group as 100% across-the-board intolerant bigots,  noting instead that 47 of them (among their bigoted ranks) wisely voted in support of the bill....see I'm a glass-half-full optimist type (albeit glass one-third full here).   
Cato, as she claimed in her tweet ("putting your hands behind your back is a best practice while detained, handcuffed or not"), that is the LAST thing you'd want to do.  Instead you'd want to show a cop your hands at all times.  This was 'check-ME-out' theatrics.   

https://twitter.com/alaynatreene/status/1551689415625408513?s=21&t=Jp0CshQS47WHC1r7wLpetg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 25, 2022, 09:04:19 PM
Cato, as she claimed in her tweet ("putting your hands behind your back is a best practice while detained, handcuffed or not"), that is the LAST thing you'd want to do.  Instead you'd want to show a cop your hands at all times.  This was 'check-ME-out' theatrics.   

Is this a serious post?

The cop was behind her, escorting her away, holding onto her wrists. Was she supposed to be wildly waving the other one around so he could track the motion more easily?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 26, 2022, 09:44:13 PM
https://twitter.com/pelositracker_/status/1551967716759699457?s=21&t=SFdoIuyj6Y7YeNE0Z7hfkg

Not only are our politics a joke, the people in charge commit brazen crimes in full public view! And nobody does excrement!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 26, 2022, 11:23:13 PM
Is this a serious post?

The cop was behind her, escorting her away, holding onto her wrists. Was she supposed to be wildly waving the other one around so he could track the motion more easily?
Sure was. 
She had BOTH wrists 'clasped together' as if she were in fact 'handcuffed' - grandstanding pure and simple.  Me I'm not giving some/any politician a pass based on which side of the aisle they reside.  She's a clown.   
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 27, 2022, 12:14:11 PM
Sorry to interrupt the latest manufactured outrage about something AOC did

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/27/us/indiana-doctor-child-rape-abortion-ag-investigation/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 27, 2022, 02:47:36 PM
Sorry to interrupt the latest manufactured outrage about something AOC did

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/27/us/indiana-doctor-child-rape-abortion-ag-investigation/index.html
Oh that's ok, no need to be sorry  ;)   

Matter of fact if I didn't know better I'd suspect the put-on 'sorrow' served more as a mechanism to arbitrarily post a hyper-partisan assessment and and absurd one at that.  Put simply, I mocked a grandstanding politician on her theatrics and there was no 'outrage' in it let alone it being 'manufactured' so no need for the hyperbolic 'outrage' swipe simply because I had the temerity to mock a politician who in this particular case just happened to be one of your sacred cows. :-)  Had I in fact mocked that 'in fact cow' MTG in the exact same manner and under the exact same circumstances would you be sarcastically taking me to task as is the case here?   Me I don't care what side of the aisle a politician resides; a politician's a politician and they're all fair game and hardly the venerable celebrities some cable networks make them out to be (depending on the news source), i.e. one source's scumbag is another one's saint and vice versa.

now back to the news

https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/27/us/indiana-doctor-child-rape-abortion-ag-investigation/index.html

.


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 27, 2022, 07:42:04 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/27/politics/schumer-manchin-deal-build-back-better/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/27/politics/schumer-manchin-deal-build-back-better/index.html)

Didn't expect that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 27, 2022, 11:54:55 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/27/politics/schumer-manchin-deal-build-back-better/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2022/07/27/politics/schumer-manchin-deal-build-back-better/index.html)

Didn't expect that.
There's a theory that Manchin killed this bill because McConnell said the Republicans wouldn't support the CHIPs bill if they passed legislation on climate change or taxing rich people, and now that they passed CHIPs yesterday he's giving them the People's Elbow (that one's for you, mj).

I feel like it's a theory that gives too much credit to Manchin and the Democrats though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 28, 2022, 05:50:25 AM
Smol gubmint

https://twitter.com/mjs_DC/status/1552382194164850689?t=RB8FdJl286097sujsLIyqg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 28, 2022, 07:24:47 AM
“The party, which is centrist, has no specific policies yet.”

We already have one of those, they're called the Democrats.

https://twitter.com/davelevinthal/status/1552440315335827458?t=39ZN60pLFn90S8EPKutRwg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on July 28, 2022, 07:41:41 AM
“The party, which is centrist, has no specific policies yet.”

We already have one of those, they're called the Democrats.

https://twitter.com/davelevinthal/status/1552440315335827458?t=39ZN60pLFn90S8EPKutRwg&s=19

SHOOOO RYYYUUUKIN!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 28, 2022, 08:10:56 AM
Hasn't Doge coin tanking wiped out his wealth yet?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on July 28, 2022, 08:14:50 AM
Hasn't Doge coin tanking wiped out his wealth yet?

Now's the time to buy doge coin
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 28, 2022, 11:05:53 AM
Lol, massive pieces of excrement.

https://twitter.com/GreggFavre/status/1552601504107962370?t=yWtHvPUqc7SPoARLgjPHCw&s=19 (https://twitter.com/GreggFavre/status/1552601504107962370?t=yWtHvPUqc7SPoARLgjPHCw&s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 28, 2022, 01:07:16 PM
Here are the 41 repubs who voted against the vet-healthcare bill (47 dems, 8 repubs, 2 Indies voted in favor):
https://www.newsweek.com/41-senate-republicans-voted-against-veterans-health-care-1728613 

Only one democrat voted against the bill: Chuck Schumer.  Chuck you schmuck,  wtf and why?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 28, 2022, 02:23:44 PM
Schumer's Twitter account is silent on it. Let's see how long that will last.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 28, 2022, 03:26:23 PM
So the 1776 Restoration Movement, formerly the Freedom Convoy, have set up shop around the National Mall for the past couple of weeks. Another, rival right wing trucker protest group showed up to counter protest the 1776RM because they claim that the 1776RM has pedos as members. The results are about what you would expect.

https://www.thedailybeast.com/police-called-as-rival-right-wing-convoy-groups-duke-it-out-in-dc (https://www.thedailybeast.com/police-called-as-rival-right-wing-convoy-groups-duke-it-out-in-dc)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 28, 2022, 05:04:26 PM
https://twitter.com/Ward2Harris/status/1552306217057411073?t=dvyx346syEOsKLzG8557gg&s=19 (https://twitter.com/Ward2Harris/status/1552306217057411073?t=dvyx346syEOsKLzG8557gg&s=19)

Expanding voting access is good.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 28, 2022, 05:46:45 PM
https://twitter.com/Ward2Harris/status/1552306217057411073?t=dvyx346syEOsKLzG8557gg&s=19 (https://twitter.com/Ward2Harris/status/1552306217057411073?t=dvyx346syEOsKLzG8557gg&s=19)

Expanding voting access is good.
Hopefully they don't pull a Florida and make some excrement up to nullify it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 29, 2022, 07:34:04 AM
Here are the 41 repubs who voted against the vet-healthcare bill (47 dems, 8 repubs, 2 Indies voted in favor):
https://www.newsweek.com/41-senate-republicans-voted-against-veterans-health-care-1728613 

Only one democrat voted against the bill: Chuck Schumer.  Chuck you schmuck,  wtf and why?

So I'm not sure on the procedures but apparently Schumer had to change his vote to Nay in order to allow for another vote on the legislation, currently scheduled on Monday.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on July 29, 2022, 08:54:57 AM
So I'm not sure on the procedures but apparently Schumer had to change his vote to Nay in order to allow for another vote on the legislation, currently scheduled on Monday.

I figured it was some goofy Senate nonsense like that. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 01, 2022, 10:41:30 PM
"We hang the petty thief, and appoint the great ones to public office"  - Aesop

https://twitter.com/Izengabe_/status/1554128129286971392

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6d/Poker_Omaha_Beispielhand3.jpg/320px-Poker_Omaha_Beispielhand3.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 03, 2022, 09:37:35 AM
I'm sorry

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220803/7be65999b8688c09e4e1e2ae99594875.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 03, 2022, 10:05:10 AM
I feel like you're not, though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 03, 2022, 10:07:30 AM
I feel like you're not, though.
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220803/80a843ec50f92b492e9483cb189c3788.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 03, 2022, 10:14:59 AM
Worse than Hiroshima. That was just an A-bomb
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 05, 2022, 12:14:35 PM
https://twitter.com/laurajedeed/status/1555557890806644738?s=21&t=0AkIdutM1vEWdkeQKO62KA
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 05, 2022, 12:42:14 PM
'I wish they all could be California girls'

Assuming the democrats retain the Senate in 2022 and now that Patrick Leahy's retiring, Diane Feinstein at the ripe young age of 89 would become senate pro tempore making her 3rd in line for the presidency after Kammy and Nancy Milkers should Joe end up taking a powder.

Diane Feinstein   (and her luxuriant auburn tresses)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8b/Senator_Dianne_Feinstein_%2850520709932%29.jpg/320px-Senator_Dianne_Feinstein_%2850520709932%29.jpg)
Diane Feinstein's bush
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/Bent_over_bush_with_snow_and_porch.JPG/320px-Bent_over_bush_with_snow_and_porch.JPG)


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 05, 2022, 03:26:28 PM
https://twitter.com/travisakers/status/1555628092227391493?s=21&t=oAADCq-v0uvl_khpW6kseg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 05, 2022, 03:31:03 PM
Huh. Tim Brown seems like he's kind of an poopchute.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 06, 2022, 09:22:12 AM
Hot Chuck-on-Chuck action

https://twitter.com/ChuckGrassley/status/1555614300563292160?t=Z88VEMDkWPkKfvG58RqgWg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 06, 2022, 10:27:49 AM
Yikes

https://twitter.com/FOX17Kylie/status/1555021415757365248?t=qeB9gnNbfv1P0YwUvJtxyg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 07, 2022, 09:07:29 AM
Projection

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/rick-scott-cpac-militant-left-b2024164.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 07, 2022, 09:33:32 AM
Projection

https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/rick-scott-cpac-militant-left-b2024164.html

He's talking about you. You, Badger, are the greatest threat that America has ever faced. How do you feel about that?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 07, 2022, 03:10:50 PM
lol, democracy

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220807/f3ca15a4cbecb0f3fc0e37fcab9b84f6.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220807/336865bcc7b5939db01d96ed22b4268d.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on August 07, 2022, 07:04:51 PM
(https://preview.redd.it/59fmjwpvccg91.jpg?width=600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f683bb89765049e3b03007742689fceb93bc21fe)

Not a porno
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 07, 2022, 11:14:49 PM
(https://preview.redd.it/59fmjwpvccg91.jpg?width=600&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f683bb89765049e3b03007742689fceb93bc21fe)

Not a porno

She def fucked that guy tho
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 07, 2022, 11:16:04 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-9246917/Marjorie-Taylor-Green-openly-cheated-husband-men-gym.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 09, 2022, 04:03:05 PM
lol, democracy

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220807/f3ca15a4cbecb0f3fc0e37fcab9b84f6.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220807/336865bcc7b5939db01d96ed22b4268d.jpg)

Imagine if instead of all these fantasy bills to fight covid/inflation that don't actually fight covid/inflation went to Medicare. It's enough to fund it for more than the next decade
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 10, 2022, 08:48:04 AM
Who watches the watchmen?

https://twitter.com/JessicaValenti/status/1557063714708328448?t=PyQxHHXpPaQAnzdHMIODHQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 10, 2022, 01:49:35 PM
Who watches the watchmen?

https://twitter.com/JessicaValenti/status/1557063714708328448?t=PyQxHHXpPaQAnzdHMIODHQ&s=19
Well put.  A lot of questions here. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mRqnjGdlqqo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 10, 2022, 06:56:08 PM
Did you say "divisive" Ms. Shiksa? ....or maybe not-so-thinly veiled.....? 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2022/07/19/jerry-nadler-jewish-identity-politics-new-york-city/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrFkgyOOY30.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 11, 2022, 04:38:49 AM
Did you say "divisive" Ms. Shiksa? ....or maybe not-so-thinly veiled.....? 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/lifestyle/2022/07/19/jerry-nadler-jewish-identity-politics-new-york-city/

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GrFkgyOOY30.
That's a weird primary.

So is NY-10.

Also, freak Sean Patrick Maloney.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 11, 2022, 06:20:19 AM
This is decent.

https://twitter.com/adamslily/status/1557542551577583616?t=5K_ldlh0k_zoxz3UgjEzfA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 11, 2022, 08:18:35 AM
Instead of making it to where you need to "not increase the number of audits" for people making less than 400k

Why not just make the tax code simpler for people making less than 400k to comply with?

To me this seems like an absolutely backwards freaking process
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 11, 2022, 08:32:55 AM
That's a weird primary.

So is NY-10.

Also, freak Sean Patrick Maloney.
Last night on Ch. NY1HD I caught the NY-10 democratic debate.  Amusing in spots, interesting in others…..”hey, is that former Bklyn D.A. Liz Holtzman?!”  Two other (younger) woman appeared to be vying for the “I’m the most progressive of the bunch” title: an Asian woman (I don’t want to misspell her name) and (my chauvinistic objectifying aside) a cute babe named Rivera.

As for the Clinton Canuck Mahoney, I think he might warm up to your ‘freak Mahoney’ suggestion  ; )

”Strangers in the night exchanging glances…what were the chances…..LUBE-e-do-be-do…”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 11, 2022, 08:38:00 AM
Instead of making it to where you need to "not increase the number of audits" for people making less than 400k

Why not just make the tax code simpler for people making less than 400k to comply with?

To me this seems like an absolutely backwards freaking process

dcm proving stopped clock theory correct again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 11, 2022, 09:08:50 AM
dcm proving stopped clock theory correct again.
“I’d like to buy a consonant please?….may I have an ‘N’ ?”     ; )

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/6b/Bottle_of_Cutty_Sark_Scotch_Whisky_with_box.JPG/469px-Bottle_of_Cutty_Sark_Scotch_Whisky_with_box.JPG) 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 11, 2022, 09:18:45 AM
Instead of making it to where you need to "not increase the number of audits" for people making less than 400k

Why not just make the tax code simpler for people making less than 400k to comply with?

To me this seems like an absolutely backwards freaking process
Good idea. Just need to defeat the tax prep lobby who prefers to keep things complicated to justify their jobs.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 11, 2022, 09:26:51 AM
Good idea. Just need to defeat the tax prep lobby who prefers to keep things complicated to justify their jobs.

Let's keep encouraging him, he's only a short step away from justifying UBI...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 11, 2022, 01:00:24 PM
Garland speaking at 2:30.

Wonder if it's about Mar-a-lago or the armed guy who was just stopped trying to breach the Cincinnati field office following two days of GOP leaders threatening Merrick Garland with impeachment.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/08/11/fbi-building-breach-armed/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/08/11/fbi-building-breach-armed/)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 11, 2022, 02:29:28 PM
Turns out it's both. DOJ filed a request to unseal the search warrant.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 14, 2022, 02:13:24 PM
https://mobile.twitter.com/immeme0


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 15, 2022, 09:04:09 AM
https://twitter.com/scotthech/status/1558964169243648000?s=21&t=rfRHGEvllmbS6gml6lK8eg

I’ve been begging for a legitimate 3rd party since I was 12 and this one is somehow worse than the 2 shitty main ones
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 15, 2022, 09:11:32 AM
https://twitter.com/scotthech/status/1558964169243648000?s=21&t=rfRHGEvllmbS6gml6lK8eg

I’ve been begging for a legitimate 3rd party since I was 12 and this one is somehow worse than the 2 shitty main ones

Because the problem is that despite the delusional rhetoric about the Dems being socialists, your third party needs to sit to the left of the Dems as they've been dragged way too far into centre-right territory. It seems like Yang is trying to occupy some kind of nonexistent middle ground between the Dems and the Republicans, an area which is already fully congested.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on August 15, 2022, 11:45:32 AM
https://twitter.com/scotthech/status/1558964169243648000?s=21&t=rfRHGEvllmbS6gml6lK8eg

I’ve been begging for a legitimate 3rd party since I was 12 and this one is somehow worse than the 2 shitty main ones

If you are looking for a legitimate progressive party, look into the Green Party. I'm involved in the Tennessee Green Party. It's a tough uphill battle but I was sick of bitching and not doing anything.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 15, 2022, 01:28:25 PM
“Michelle [Obama] always says, you know, ‘When they go low, we go high.’ No. When they go low, we kick them.  That’s what this new Democratic Party is about.”  - Eric Holder, Fmr US Attny Gen.

Sounds like a man who clearly has been dragged waaay too far to the center-right…….    ……right
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 15, 2022, 07:43:28 PM
https://twitter.com/magghart/status/1559169482228121605?s=21&t=kix292gxOPZb6oILzSWoAA
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 15, 2022, 07:50:40 PM
Because the problem is that despite the delusional rhetoric about the Dems being socialists, your third party needs to sit to the left of the Dems as they've been dragged way too far into centre-right territory.

LOL
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on August 15, 2022, 08:24:24 PM
If you are looking for a legitimate progressive party, look into the Green Party. I'm involved in the Tennessee Green Party. It's a tough uphill battle but I was sick of bitching and not doing anything.

I do a bit of volunteering for the local DSA, it definitely feels better than bitching about things online for sure.

That being said, this is probably the best campaign ad I've ever seen, based on personal enjoyment:

https://twitter.com/umichvoter/status/1559011904076529664
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 16, 2022, 12:01:16 PM
https://twitter.com/grocerieswegner/status/1559290958843449346?s=21&t=-jCeMf49FwffQJVJC6Z8Sw

https://twitter.com/nothoodlum/status/1559273547431911425?s=21&t=-jCeMf49FwffQJVJC6Z8Sw
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 16, 2022, 12:27:06 PM
Someone on Oz's team is actively sabotaging him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on August 16, 2022, 01:17:34 PM
Someone on Oz's team is actively sabotaging him.

Haha, plus he's also doing a spectacular job by simply being his shitty, shitty self.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 16, 2022, 05:58:36 PM
Haha, plus he's also doing a spectacular job by simply being his shitty, shitty self.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/06/Chittychittybangbangposter.jpg)

Dr. Oz was once called out by the medical community (and Clare McCaskill) for his snake oil diet product claims.   
Reminds me of an unfunny Larry Storch (F-Troop)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/d/d0/Dr._Oz_at_ServiceNation_2008.jpg/320px-Dr._Oz_at_ServiceNation_2008.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/8/88/Larry_Scorch_1965.JPG)

Speaking of 'outsiders' while Liz Chaney's raised a record $15M+, 96%  (96%!) has come in from outside the state.  ....fwiw

As for the homegrown kid Fetterman, reminds me of the high-brow limerick:

There once was a man from Bel-Air,
who was shagging his chick on the stairs,
well the bannister broke
so he doubled his stroke
and finished her off in mid-air.


Extending thought and prayers to Zach -- speedy recovery kid and lay off the MILFs.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/82/Cameron_Diaz_cropped.jpg/201px-Cameron_Diaz_cropped.jpg)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 16, 2022, 10:19:36 PM
Keep your head up Liz you would-be scouser....you'll never walk alone....O.J. & Voltaire: you're in good company....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2Tn8OMWhsc


(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/6/6a/Shankly_Gates.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 17, 2022, 12:06:58 AM
I freaking hate Liz Cheney but the thought of what will replace her is horrifying.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 18, 2022, 08:32:56 PM
“Michelle [Obama] always says, you know, ‘When they go low, we go high.’ No. When they go low, we kick them.  That’s what this new Democratic Party is about.”  - Eric Holder, Fmr US Attny Gen.

Sounds like a man who clearly has been dragged waaay too far to the center-right…….    ……right
LOL
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220819/89e140712775e3eea07a9497767714bc.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 20, 2022, 02:14:45 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220819/89e140712775e3eea07a9497767714bc.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/76/Angle_obtuse.svg/300px-Angle_obtuse.svg.png)




(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4c/Moby_Dick_for_Wikicommons.jpg/177px-Moby_Dick_for_Wikicommons.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/f3/Mocha_dick_1870_UK_reprint.jpg/165px-Mocha_dick_1870_UK_reprint.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3b/The_Parthenon_Sculptures_–_Naked_youth_from_east_pediment_D%2C_British_Museum_%2827107511275%29.jpg/320px-The_Parthenon_Sculptures_–_Naked_youth_from_east_pediment_D%2C_British_Museum_%2827107511275%29.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/96/White_cock.jpg/320px-White_cock.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 22, 2022, 01:56:11 PM
Karens are a menace to society

 https://twitter.com/MariaLeaf/status/1561345378561232896?t=C3fMG3IbpejQYpLJuB3ELQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 23, 2022, 06:30:22 PM
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/nancy-pelosis-husband-pleads-guilty-dui-charge-sentenced-5-days-jail-rcna44456
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on August 23, 2022, 07:08:45 PM
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/nancy-pelosis-husband-pleads-guilty-dui-charge-sentenced-5-days-jail-rcna44456

Homie didn't even have to show up in court to get that verdict. 

Two Americas.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 23, 2022, 07:21:03 PM
Two Americas.

Far be it from me to defend this piece of excrement and his robber baron queynte wife...but no this is not an example of two Americas.

Do you know how many aggravated DWI's that I've come across in which the perpetrator doesn't spend another day in jail after lockup? For reference, the aggravated designation is for a BAC above .15

3 years probation sure, but even then assuming this was a misdemeanor, just regular run of the mill above .08 but below .15 DWI, its actually incredibly rare that I even have to have my clients eat 3 years probation.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 23, 2022, 10:09:01 PM
3 years probation sure, but even then assuming this was a misdemeanor, just regular run of the mill above .08 but below .15 DWI,  it's actually incredibly rare that

I even have to have my clients eat 3 years probation.

mj could you ask one of them:  for a good Old-Fashioned should I go with bourbon or rye?      thx[/size

p.s.  freak mr. milkers
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 24, 2022, 07:22:29 AM
mj could you ask one of them:  for a good Old-Fashioned should I go with bourbon or rye?      thx[/size

p.s.  freak mr. milkers

Delicious bourbon....brownest of the brown liquors. So tempting. What's that?! You want me to drink you?! But I'm in the middle of a trial!

The vast, vast majorities of my DWI pleas get accepted with my client admitting to drinking "three beers" like we're back in high school lying to our parents again.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 24, 2022, 07:50:12 AM


3 years probation sure, but even then assuming this was a misdemeanor, just regular run of the mill above .08 but below .15 DWI, its actually incredibly rare that I even have to have my clients eat 3 years probation.

Legally speaking is that the difference between DUI and DWI?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 24, 2022, 05:13:44 PM
wat

https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1562422730481598464?t=PJExZZ0iZG4UrbECtRhrrg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on August 24, 2022, 05:17:06 PM

Legally speaking is that the difference between DUI and DWI?

The terms are interchangeable basically for the same thing. In NY we have DWI's under the penal law which are classified as any operation of a motor vehicle with a BAC above a .08. In Florida, its the same BAC, same verbiage in terms of the statute , but they just call it driving under the influence, or DUI.

NY has different levels of charges for DWI's-anything between a .03 and .07 is a driving while ability impaired or DWAI (a violation, not a crime which is YUGE for people trying to avoid a record), anything at a .08 to a .17 is the classic misdemeanor DWI (the closer to an .08 the easier it is to argue towards the impaired either because of a bad calibration of the intoxilizer machine, too much time from police encounter to the test, or even something stupid like the client burped while the test was being administered and the more favorable a plea you're going to be offered) and anything from a .18 above is an aggravated DWI which is a freaking pain in the derriere if not impossible to get down to a violation from the misdemeanor.

The local prosecutors office used to have a hard and fast rule of not offering pleas to impaired violations off of dwi's in which the accused refuses a breath or blood test, but I'm finding lately if the client is really willing to hustle in terms of treatment and mitigation, that it's not as unattainable as it used to be. The problem with litigating these things, at least out in the island is unless you can really find a probable cause issue in terms of a bad stop, or bad search, once there's a reading its really hard to get that BAC out of the juries head, so refusing does invite litigation and the prosecutors are cognizant of it/want to create a culture of punishment for not complying with a request to take a test.

I'm assuming Paul Pelosi had no priors. Someone like him who's already in his late 70's with no priors? I wouldn't take 3 years probation unless the Judge made it clear that if I plan on litigating this case they will sentence them to a jail stint if I lose. I also wouldn't give a excrement about such a client eating a misdemeanor at that point in their lives (not like they have to worry about certain collateral consequences). Really I'd be looking to try and plea them to some sort of outpatient treatment for a misdemeanor conviction but a conditional discharge (no jail, no probation). The license consequences are what they are, there's nothing anyone can do about them, save get an acquittal.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 24, 2022, 07:41:23 PM
The terms are interchangeable basically for the same thing. In NY we have DWI's under the penal law which are classified as any operation of a motor vehicle with a BAC above a .08. In Florida, its the same BAC, same verbiage in terms of the statute , but they just call it driving under the influence, or DUI.

NY has different levels of charges for DWI's-anything between a .03 and .07 is a driving while ability impaired or DWAI (a violation, not a crime which is YUGE for people trying to avoid a record), anything at a .08 to a .17 is the classic misdemeanor DWI (the closer to an .08 the easier it is to argue towards the impaired either because of a bad calibration of the intoxilizer machine, too much time from police encounter to the test, or even something stupid like the client burped while the test was being administered and the more favorable a plea you're going to be offered) and anything from a .18 above is an aggravated DWI which is a freaking pain in the derriere if not impossible to get down to a violation from the misdemeanor.

The local prosecutors office used to have a hard and fast rule of not offering pleas to impaired violations off of dwi's in which the accused refuses a breath or blood test, but I'm finding lately if the client is really willing to hustle in terms of treatment and mitigation, that it's not as unattainable as it used to be. The problem with litigating these things, at least out in the island is unless you can really find a probable cause issue in terms of a bad stop, or bad search, once there's a reading its really hard to get that BAC out of the juries head, so refusing does invite litigation and the prosecutors are cognizant of it/want to create a culture of punishment for not complying with a request to take a test.

I'm assuming Paul Pelosi had no priors. Someone like him who's already in his late 70's with no priors? I wouldn't take 3 years probation unless the Judge made it clear that if I plan on litigating this case they will sentence them to a jail stint if I lose. I also wouldn't give a excrement about such a client eating a misdemeanor at that point in their lives (not like they have to worry about certain collateral consequences). Really I'd be looking to try and plea them to some sort of outpatient treatment for a misdemeanor conviction but a conditional discharge (no jail, no probation). The license consequences are what they are, there's nothing anyone can do about them, save get an acquittal.

Two key things I took from this (genuinely informative) post:

1. DWAI exists and doesn't stand for Driving While Almost Impaired, which is disappointing; and

2. DWI/DUI requires a jury verdict, I always assumed it was something that was decided upon by a magistrate (it might be in Canada / the UK / Somalia / wherever, I've thankfully never had reason to find out).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 25, 2022, 03:54:52 PM
Ca. looking to eliminate gas-powered cars by 2035.  Good move, now get your infrastructure in place (including where the batteries are coming from).

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/25/1119381508/california-ban-gas-cars-2035
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 25, 2022, 05:24:24 PM
Ca. looking to eliminate gas-powered cars by 2035.  Good move, now get your infrastructure in place (including where the batteries are coming from).

https://www.npr.org/2022/08/25/1119381508/california-ban-gas-cars-2035

Too lazy to read the title but it says they're looking to phase out the sale of new gas powered cars.

I wonder how this can be circumvented with selling cars as used
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 26, 2022, 11:11:15 AM
Too lazy to read the title but it says they're looking to phase out the sale of new gas powered cars.

I wonder how this can be circumvented with selling cars as used
Good question.  In any event they better get their infrastructure updated if PE&G’s spotty record is any indication.  Why only yesterday….

https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/power-outage-hits-Oakland-area-17398249.php
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 26, 2022, 01:14:51 PM
https://twitter.com/NoOneUnscripted/status/1561542133894758400

I'm not arguing with the guy so much as I'm amused at how some in cyberland view themselves as THE guiding light o/b/o the unwashed

- the gospel according to me
- the 2nd gospel according to me
- the 3rd gospel according to me

https://twitter.com/NoOneUnscripted/status/1561542133894758400
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 30, 2022, 07:58:06 AM
"More democracy is bad for our brand"

https://twitter.com/tylerbowyer/status/1564459685909970944?t=xRwSGWW_F0lYY4yX_4SPwg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 30, 2022, 04:13:34 PM
First I've heard of this story. That photo is the most uncomfortable thing I've seen in a long time, the more I look at it the weirder it gets.

https://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-endorse-shapiro-following-mastriano-confederate-uniform-2022-8
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on August 30, 2022, 05:09:01 PM
First I've heard of this story. That photo is the most uncomfortable thing I've seen in a long time, the more I look at it the weirder it gets.

https://www.businessinsider.com/republicans-endorse-shapiro-following-mastriano-confederate-uniform-2022-8

Short shorts + blazer is a bold look.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 30, 2022, 06:36:02 PM
Short shorts + blazer is a bold look.

Isn't that Amber Waves behind him?

(pix released under the freedom of info act  ..smirk)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 31, 2022, 08:43:37 AM
Oz’s mouthpiece is a pos

https://www.post-gazette.com/news/politics-state/2022/08/31/john-fetterman-dr-mehmet-oz-debates-stroke-health-concessions/stories/202208310107

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 31, 2022, 02:32:41 PM
https://twitter.com/GBBranstetter/status/1565044613693558785?t=LXA-GdsiWKIYG-huefNsiw&s=19https://twitter.com/GBBranstetter/status/1565044613693558785?t=LXA-GdsiWKIYG-huefNsiw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 31, 2022, 02:38:52 PM
https://twitter.com/GBBranstetter/status/1565044613693558785?t=LXA-GdsiWKIYG-huefNsiw&s=19https://twitter.com/GBBranstetter/status/1565044613693558785?t=LXA-GdsiWKIYG-huefNsiw&s=19

Like Greg Abbott and his followers wouldn't consider the decimation of anything called a welfare agency to be anything but a win.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 31, 2022, 07:18:07 PM
Mary Peltola just beat Sarah Palin for the AL at large seat.

EDIT:Spelling
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 31, 2022, 07:28:51 PM
"I'm a loser, and I'm not what I appear to be"
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/64/Lisa_Loeb_07-22-2015_-2_%2819312925853%29.jpg/379px-Lisa_Loeb_07-22-2015_-2_%2819312925853%29.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 04, 2022, 10:28:26 AM
GOP Sen. Ron Johnson is a clown

https://www.salon.com/2022/09/02/ron-johnson-wants-to-coax-seniors-back-to-work-amid-on-social-security_partner/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 04, 2022, 04:07:10 PM
GOP Sen. Ron Johnson is a clown

https://www.salon.com/2022/09/02/ron-johnson-wants-to-coax-seniors-back-to-work-amid-on-social-security_partner/
Trying to figure out whose error this was, Barnes, Johnson, or Salon:

Quote
"Ron Johnson's solution to the labor shortage: send seniors back to work," Barnes said in a statement Thursday, noting that Johnson has voted to raise the retirement age from 65 to 70.

The age has already been raised from 66 to 67 and hasn't been 65 in years.

Regardless, all attempts to raise the full retirement age are essentially a Social Security cut.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 04, 2022, 04:18:07 PM
Trying to figure out whose error this was, Barnes, Johnson, or Salon:

The age has already been raised from 66 to 67 and hasn't been 65 in years.

Regardless, all attempts to raise the full retirement age are essentially a Social Security cut.

I think that in isolation I don't have a huge problem with the idea of reducing or removing the tax burden on working seniors, although it needs to be at the bottom end and not just a further tax cut for rich old guys. Seniors are increasingly healthy and active and willing to work - my dad's 73 and still works full time because he loves working - but it shouldn't be used as an excuse to make state pensions smaller, later or harder to access.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 05, 2022, 07:11:23 AM
Trying to figure out whose error this was, Barnes, Johnson, or Salon:

The age has already been raised from 66 to 67 and hasn't been 65 in years.

Regardless, all attempts to raise the full retirement age are essentially a Social Security cut.

The data is skewed because of Covid-19

But with people living a lot longer raising the retirement age isn't necessarily a cut its offsetting the increase in life expectancy

And as far as I can tell, the 65-67 was phased in over 22 years, and over the time period of that phase in, the life expectancy grew greater than that age phase in
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 05, 2022, 09:29:37 AM
But with people living a lot longer raising the retirement age isn't necessarily a cut its offsetting the increase in life expectancy

And as far as I can tell, the 65-67 was phased in over 22 years, and over the time period of that phase in, the life expectancy grew greater than that age phase in
Apparently they’re not living ‘much longer’ as of late

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/life-expectancy-in-the-u-s-has-dropped-and-its-not-just-due-to-covid-19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 05, 2022, 12:58:09 PM
The data is skewed because of Covid-19

But with people living a lot longer raising the retirement age isn't necessarily a cut its offsetting the increase in life expectancy

And as far as I can tell, the 65-67 was phased in over 22 years, and over the time period of that phase in, the life expectancy grew greater than that age phase in
It's a cut.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 06, 2022, 06:44:39 PM
“This sounds quaint, and so I’m reluctant to say it, but, you know, I didn’t eat a grape until I was in my 20s. Like, literally, had never had a grape. I remember the first time I had a grape, I went, ‘Wow! This is quite tasty.’ It was absolutely ingrained so deeply in me: Never cross a picket line.  Now, teabaggin' Willie Brown?  That's another story.” - Kamala Harris

https://politicalwire.com/2022/09/06/harris-says-she-never-ate-a-grape-until-her-twenties/

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/Grapes_Angoor.JPG/640px-Grapes_Angoor.JPG)
(http://[I]“This sounds quaint, and so I’m reluctant to say it, but, you know, I didn’t eat a grape until I was in my 20s. Like, literally, had never had a grape. I remember the first time I had a grape, I went, ‘Wow! This is quite tasty.’ It was absolutely ingrained so deeply in me: Never cross a picket line.  Now, teabaggin' Willie Brown?  That's another story.” - Kamala Harris[I]

https://politicalwire.com/2022/09/06/harris-says-she-never-ate-a-grape-until-her-twenties/

[img width=600 height=450]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/Grapes_Angoor.JPG/640px-Grapes_Angoor.JPG)
(http://[I]“This sounds quaint, and so I’m reluctant to say it, but, you know, I didn’t eat a grape until I was in my 20s. Like, literally, had never had a grape. I remember the first time I had a grape, I went, ‘Wow! This is quite tasty.’ It was absolutely ingrained so deeply in me: Never cross a picket line.  Now, teabaggin' Willie Brown?  That's another story.” - Kamala Harris[I]

https://politicalwire.com/2022/09/06/harris-says-she-never-ate-a-grape-until-her-twenties/

[img width=600 height=450]https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/55/Grapes_Angoor.JPG/640px-Grapes_Angoor.JPG)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/27/%22Roka%22_brand_chocolate_wafer_balls%2C_2015-06-06.jpg/320px-%22Roka%22_brand_chocolate_wafer_balls%2C_2015-06-06.jpg)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 06, 2022, 07:15:05 PM
I love being called a Russian troll on Twitter because I dared to suggest the federal government do anything to help Jackson, MS.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 06, 2022, 09:56:25 PM
I love being called a Russian troll on Twitter because I dared to suggest the federal government do anything to help Jackson, MS.

Yeah but how were you dressed when you said it? Were you leading them on?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 06, 2022, 10:30:50 PM
Yeah but how were you dressed when you said it? Were you leading them on?
I was wearing a ushanka and riding a tank with a big Z on it but other than that...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 07, 2022, 01:43:18 PM
GQ did a feature piece on AOC and one particular group seems furious about it in the replies - can you guess who?

https://twitter.com/GQMagazine/status/1567485351123423234?t=gXlp1p4VwZjQwPXGYaaiaw&s=19

Spoiler: it's blue MAGA Karens
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 07, 2022, 08:27:33 PM
No. No, thst's really not it at all, not even remotely or in any way, shape or form. You absolute fuckwit.

https://twitter.com/JesseKellyDC/status/1567262623674122240
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 07, 2022, 08:32:22 PM
GQ did a feature piece on AOC and one particular group seems furious about it in the replies - can you guess who?

https://twitter.com/GQMagazine/status/1567485351123423234?t=gXlp1p4VwZjQwPXGYaaiaw&s=19

Spoiler: it's blue MAGA Karens

ThE tRuMp CuLt as the media tries to canonize this retard.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 08, 2022, 06:21:38 AM
ThE tRuMp CuLt as the media tries to canonize this retard.
As much as you insist, it's hard to make that stick on someone who's generally right about most things.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 08, 2022, 09:01:24 AM
Apparently they’re not living ‘much longer’ as of late

https://www.healthline.com/health-news/life-expectancy-in-the-u-s-has-dropped-and-its-not-just-due-to-covid-19

For those of us who are vaccinated, not using recreational Fentanyl or committing suicide this doesn't sound like much of a problem
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 08, 2022, 03:49:19 PM
https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-las-vegas-newspapers-fc98699b524d0855b3b6e363a3f0455c (https://apnews.com/article/2022-midterm-elections-las-vegas-newspapers-fc98699b524d0855b3b6e363a3f0455c)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 12, 2022, 06:07:26 PM
https://twitter.com/Chet_Cannon/status/1569177702401458176

LOL

In other news, good to see Charlie Crist literally compare himself to Jesus Christ.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 13, 2022, 03:17:27 PM
All rightwing politics are projection, as usual

https://twitter.com/ryanlcooper/status/1569726567982538754?t=SeMPKZWsxRiKm1AI-UjOyg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 13, 2022, 05:43:59 PM
Much of 'politics' irrespective of source is projection

https://www.newsweek.com/when-it-comes-banning-books-both-right-left-are-guilty-opinion-1696045

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/8e/Lady_chatterley%27s_lover_1959_US_unexpurgated_edition.jpg/158px-Lady_chatterley%27s_lover_1959_US_unexpurgated_edition.jpg)
"And when he came into her, with an intensification of relief and consummation that was pure peace to him, still she was waiting. She felt herself a little left out. And she knew, partly it was her own fault. She willed herself into this separateness. Now perhaps she was condemned to it. She lay still, feeling his motion within her, his deep-sunk intentness, the sudden quiver of him at the springing of his seed, then the slow-subsiding thrust. That thrust of the buttocks, surely it was a little ridiculous. If you were a woman, and a part in all the business, surely that thrusting of the man's buttocks was supremely ridiculous. Surely the man was intensely ridiculous in this posture and this act...Yes, this was love, this ridiculous bouncing of the buttocks, and the wilting of the poor, insignificant, moist little penis. This was the divine love!!"

TL;DR: Anal sex is a little silly, but enjoyable.   
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 13, 2022, 06:16:49 PM
That was the dumbest article I've read since the last time I clicked a New York Post link. To seriously invoke the Dr. Seuss bullshit as an example of left wing censorship? Come on.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 13, 2022, 07:57:47 PM
https://thehill.com/changing-america/enrichment/education/3640520-less-than-half-of-americans-can-name-all-three-branches-of-government-survey-finds/

Maybe it's time to start making people take a test while they're lining up. If you don't understand basic civics, you shouldn't be allowed to actively participate in them.

(I suspect that a lot of developed nations would fare similarly, including both that I have called home. The point stands there as well.)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 13, 2022, 08:48:24 PM
The FBI seized Mike Lindell's phone.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 14, 2022, 09:18:45 AM
That was the dumbest article I've read since the last time I clicked a New York Post link. To seriously invoke the Dr. Seuss bullshit as an example of left wing censorship? Come on.

That was the darnedest article I've read since the last time I clicked on a Mother Jones sports link https://www.motherjones.com/topics/sports/    Imagine suggesting that plucking books off shelves is the sole province of 'them' and them only.  Come on.  I'll see your Dr. Seuss and raise you a To Kill a Mockingbird / The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn / Of Mice and Men bundle (courtesy of the Burbank, California United School District; Burbank hardly serving as a bastion of hyper-righty sensibilities). 

Me, I thought you'd prefer the titillating salaciousness of Lady Chatterly but no, you're too emotionally caught up tilting at political windmills <--- ok now that's probably the dumbest thing you've read... 

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 17, 2022, 06:13:14 AM
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Reverse_Freedom_Rides
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 17, 2022, 07:58:40 AM
https://twitter.com/home

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/ca/Martha%27s_Vineyard_wayfinding_sign.jpg/240px-Martha%27s_Vineyard_wayfinding_sign.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 18, 2022, 01:42:01 PM
How many times did the New York Times publish this guy?

https://twitter.com/pleonidasp/status/1569752239434092548?t=cdpMNhosjnsfzSFuTcdzsA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 18, 2022, 07:50:42 PM
That was the dumbest article I've read since the last time I clicked a New York Post link.
 
  https://nypost.com/2022/09/16/sex-toy-company-offers-relief-after-shipment-crashes/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 18, 2022, 10:28:13 PM
 
  https://nypost.com/2022/09/16/sex-toy-company-offers-relief-after-shipment-crashes/
Thoughts and prayers
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 19, 2022, 12:29:09 PM
https://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-62954203.amp
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 19, 2022, 01:02:32 PM
Need more meat for the meat grinder

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20220919/3b32bafe605208054821a0fc35b60870.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 19, 2022, 01:17:33 PM
Need more meat for the meat grinder
Especially if Joe's serious.  "U.S. forces?"  Just say no Joe.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2022/sep/19/joe-biden-repeats-claim-that-us-forces-would-defend-taiwan-if-china-attacked
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 20, 2022, 05:52:05 PM
The migrants flown to Martha's Vineyard by the FL state government are suing DeSantis.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 20, 2022, 06:09:33 PM
The migrants flown to Martha's Vineyard by the FL state government are suing DeSantis.

Amazing how the federal government under this administration can leave over 50 migrants in a truck to cook alive, but flying them to a liberal posh enclave (and exposing rank hypocrisy) is somehow the bridge too far.

This was brought forth by political operatives trying to nab Ronny D before his eventual 2024 run.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 20, 2022, 06:21:41 PM
Amazing how the federal government under this administration can leave over 50 migrants in a truck to cook alive, but flying them to a liberal posh enclave (and exposing rank hypocrisy) is somehow the bridge too far.

This was brought forth by political operatives trying to nab Ronny D before his eventual 2024 run.

I can't wait until we can fist each other at the tailgate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 20, 2022, 10:40:53 PM
I can't wait until we can fist each other at the tailgate.

Hahahahaha, I'm just a smol fayt guy.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 21, 2022, 02:41:32 PM
Breaking: economist puzzled by the results of his life's work being carried out

https://twitter.com/LHSummers/status/1572433427365826565?t=Co2oPvcyffkRd63-0fTj3Q&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 21, 2022, 09:20:35 PM
Quote
Lawrence H. Summers
@LHSummers
...
and, I suspect, the rise of reactionary populism.
It should be a major task of social science to understand it.
  yeah ok larry -  next. time try political science while you're at it   
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 22, 2022, 02:11:44 PM
There really are no parts being left unsaid any more, are they?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/john-gibbs-women-sexism-republican_n_632be3e1e4b0013f244da138
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 22, 2022, 05:16:37 PM
There really are no parts being left unsaid any more, are they?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/john-gibbs-women-sexism-republican_n_632be3e1e4b0013f244da138

Don't know anything about the dude

But this is an aticle about something he said almost 25 years ago as a freaking kid

This shits pretty stupid from both sides of the aisle
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 22, 2022, 10:16:52 PM
There really are no parts being left unsaid any more, are they?

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/john-gibbs-women-sexism-republican_n_632be3e1e4b0013f244da138
Don't know anything about the dude

But this is an aticle about something he said almost 25 years ago as a freaking kid

This shits pretty stupid from both sides of the aisle

Tried reading the HuffPost article except for the eye candy video clutter bellyaching about Melania Trump's Xmas grifting  ..... 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on September 22, 2022, 10:34:28 PM
Unhinged leftist runs over and kills a teenager because he thought he was a "republican extremist" which you'd think would maybe cause certain leaders to tone down the rhetoric for at least a day or two.

Certain "leaders" (and by leaders I do mean vacant potatoes that have crossed into senility);
https://twitter.com/politicalmath/status/1573004711594233857
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 22, 2022, 10:38:26 PM
The United States of Waste Saves Face

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart-news/california-has-legalized-human-composting-180980809/

"my father's name was Ferdinand,
  my mother's name was Liza,
  nine months later when they had me
  they called me fertilizer
"
 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 26, 2022, 06:32:18 PM
On 2nd thought…

https://www.wsj.com/articles/in-a-time-of-crisis-public-discourse-has-descended-into-nonsense-america-china-taiwan-conversation-recession-partisan-politics-leaders-11664206243
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 27, 2022, 06:53:20 PM
We go in the toilets

https://twitter.com/mschlapp/status/1574880274814476295?t=9iUL1ovq_BTZUYPBK-nR7Q&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 27, 2022, 08:50:54 PM
This is real.

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1574781301974081536
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 27, 2022, 10:27:40 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/Pig.jpg/180px-Pig.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Rep._Marjorie_Taylor_Greene_official_photo%2C_117th_Congress_%28cropped%29.jpg/180px-Rep._Marjorie_Taylor_Greene_official_photo%2C_117th_Congress_%28cropped%29.jpg)


Pig hunting; the irony:  https://action.mtgpeopleoverpoliticians.com/mtg-hoghunt/

The power, the faaabulousness, the should've been:  https://twitter.com/MikeSington/status/1574846047154675714

And I am one American who will never forgive this grave injustice!!  https://twitter.com/JodyKay8084/status/1574860569500327937


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on September 28, 2022, 08:30:56 AM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/49/Pig.jpg/180px-Pig.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/57/Rep._Marjorie_Taylor_Greene_official_photo%2C_117th_Congress_%28cropped%29.jpg/180px-Rep._Marjorie_Taylor_Greene_official_photo%2C_117th_Congress_%28cropped%29.jpg)


Pig hunting; the irony:  https://action.mtgpeopleoverpoliticians.com/mtg-hoghunt/

The power, the faaabulousness, the should've been:  https://twitter.com/MikeSington/status/1574846047154675714

And I am one American who will never forgive this grave injustice!!  https://twitter.com/JodyKay8084/status/1574860569500327937


I don't know your politics or if you're being sarcastic but the DNC\Hilary lost the election because Hilary was shoved down American's throats. We were told "stand down, it's her turn." Even if we wanted someone else for the Democratic nomination.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on September 28, 2022, 03:21:05 PM
I don't know your politics or if you're being sarcastic but the DNC\Hilary lost the election because Hilary was shoved down American's throats. We were told "stand down, it's her turn." Even if we wanted someone else for the Democratic nomination.



Hilary was shoved down American's throats.

We were told "stand down, it's her turn." Even if we wanted someone else for the Democratic nomination.
Your in bold says it all (and I thought my OTT "faaabulous" swipe gave away my Hillary abhorrence); that entitled skank, that counterfeit white trash aristocrat.  From day one when HRC ran against Rick "sign it!" Lazio, Clinton's candidacy was incubated by an obsequious, pail-toting media.  freakin sow..   




(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/39/2017_None_of_the_Above_Party_16_x_24_sign_artwork.jpg/320px-2017_None_of_the_Above_Party_16_x_24_sign_artwork.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 29, 2022, 08:48:13 AM
Debt puritans punching air

https://twitter.com/GovWhitmer/status/1575189901032583174?t=Qmm4X3LsuLhVtEnHYSnfZw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 29, 2022, 10:02:55 AM
https://twitter.com/_sn_n/status/1575324400982921217?t=GXUcNwvNN48mdT1uXNYKOA&s=19 (https://twitter.com/_sn_n/status/1575324400982921217?t=GXUcNwvNN48mdT1uXNYKOA&s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 01, 2022, 08:39:05 AM
Continuing resolution passed to fund the government through Dec. 16.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 01, 2022, 09:11:44 AM
What's a budget?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 01, 2022, 12:06:23 PM
What's a budget?
What does a Jedi on a budget eat for dessert?

Only one Cannoli
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 06, 2022, 10:53:46 PM
(https://i.redd.it/dls46srbw6s91.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 11, 2022, 07:21:18 AM
Tulsi's out, y'all.

https://twitter.com/BradMossEsq/status/1579800187715088385?t=p5jRcTE59yl5eESPsb3ZOA&s=19 (https://twitter.com/BradMossEsq/status/1579800187715088385?t=p5jRcTE59yl5eESPsb3ZOA&s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 11, 2022, 07:27:31 AM
Tulsi's out, y'all.

https://twitter.com/BradMossEsq/status/1579800187715088385?t=p5jRcTE59yl5eESPsb3ZOA&s=19 (https://twitter.com/BradMossEsq/status/1579800187715088385?t=p5jRcTE59yl5eESPsb3ZOA&s=19)
Would be cool if she did it for a coherent reason and not just because she's so open-minded her brain fell out.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 12, 2022, 04:38:49 PM
https://twitter.com/WaitingOnBiden/status/1579947449384255488?s=20&t=2CqfOqNAjxXa5LIC3uFxIg (https://twitter.com/WaitingOnBiden/status/1579947449384255488?s=20&t=2CqfOqNAjxXa5LIC3uFxIg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 12, 2022, 05:37:41 PM
Racism and redistricting  and even more racism.  Surely this must be in Bumfuck, Redstate ....y'all ?

https://calmatters.org/newsletters/whatmatters/2022/10/la-city-council-racism-redistricting/

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/12/us/los-angeles-city-council-redistricting.html

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 14, 2022, 08:26:28 PM
https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1581066687532527616?t=EjWeIxOpjnBgxfS3KIgY4w&s=19 (https://twitter.com/Acyn/status/1581066687532527616?t=EjWeIxOpjnBgxfS3KIgY4w&s=19)

What the actual freak?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 19, 2022, 02:30:36 PM
(https://i.redd.it/gqegqic6uru91.jpg)

Quote
The monument, which consists of a stone watchtower, was erected to honor the Lightning Brigade (led by John T. Wilder) of the Union Army's Army of the Cumberland. The brigade participated in the Battle of Chickamauga during the American Civil War, with the monument located on the battlefield where the brigade fought.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 19, 2022, 02:52:25 PM
How can someone actually be this freaking stupid?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 19, 2022, 04:15:53 PM
Whoa, time out Marjorie....it was to honor reenlisted Hessian mercenaries from the Revolutionary War of 1811.
+
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=onzvHxCC2lU

from the people who make your laws...

LGJ


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on October 19, 2022, 04:36:01 PM
How can someone actually think so little of and despise their constituents so much, and also be so psychopathically power-hungry and America-hating and an unfaithful, immoral nightmare of a mammal?

fyp.

(also, yes, she's breathtakingly stupid....voted into our Congress...fml)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 19, 2022, 10:06:02 PM
fyp.

(also, yes, she's breathtakingly stupid....voted into our Congress...fml)

At least Tommy Tuberville has figured out how to not speak in public.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 22, 2022, 09:23:13 AM
surprise, surprise.  fish swim, birds fly, nyt…

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/10/22/opinion/kathy-hochul-new-york-governor.amp.htmlN
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 29, 2022, 07:51:49 AM
MTG doing psycho Karen stuff

https://twitter.com/AOC/status/1586339333937991681?t=SKSD6K5BItRVGwPKoT9OsA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 31, 2022, 02:05:27 PM
https://twitter.com/MittRomney/status/1587155605025964039?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on October 31, 2022, 10:55:29 PM
https://twitter.com/MittRomney/status/1587155605025964039?s=19
^ Total Mitt dorkville;  below serious question:

What's happened the the ghouls/gobblin 'spooky' vibe that surrounded halloween?  Haunted houses and looking to scare the living daylights out of people?  Granted there was a sidebar of assholery mischief esp. when you attained punkhood (eggs, shaving cream, smashing pumpkins, etc.) but now it's just a lot of pop culture 'flavor-of-the-month' vanity stuff.  Take earlier tonight for example: this one trick or treater that showed up at our front door was a very pretty young blonde 7-8 year old girl as "Harley Quinn" who was decked out in black go-go boots, black fishnet stockings, tiny hot pants, exposed midriff and teased-out/day-glo painted hair and waaaay ott slutty makeup.  While the missus explained the DC comic character 'Harley Quinn' to me afterwards we were still a tad skeeved.  Another thing: couldn't believe mom & dad didn't give their daughter's "look" a 2nd thought before sending her out to go door-to-door trick or treatin' ...........

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fd/New_York_Comic_Con_2013_-_Harley_Quinn_%2810275536896%29.jpg/320px-New_York_Comic_Con_2013_-_Harley_Quinn_%2810275536896%29.jpg)


 I mean who's to say some pedo creep wasn't going from full Clint Gran Torino into thinking....

"Hey, get the hell off my front law.....
  ............saaay, whadda we have here??....."

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/07/ClintEastwoodCannesMay08.jpg/180px-ClintEastwoodCannesMay08.jpg)

on a lighter, more evolved note:

Q:  why's halloween the favorite holliday in Appalachia?

A:  'cause they like to pump kin
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 01, 2022, 06:39:53 AM
^ Total Mitt dorkville;  below serious question:

What's happened the the ghouls/gobblin 'spooky' vibe that surrounded halloween?  Haunted houses and looking to scare the living daylights out of people?  Granted there was a sidebar of assholery mischief esp. when you attained punkhood (eggs, shaving cream, smashing pumpkins, etc.) but now it's just a lot of pop culture 'flavor-of-the-month' vanity stuff.  Take earlier tonight for example: this one trick or treater that showed up at our front door was a very pretty young blonde 7-8 year old girl as "Harley Quinn" who was decked out in black go-go boots, black fishnet stockings, tiny hot pants, exposed midriff and teased-out/day-glo painted hair and waaaay ott slutty makeup.  While the missus explained the DC comic character 'Harley Quinn' to me afterwards we were still a tad skeeved.  Another thing: couldn't believe mom & dad didn't give their daughter's "look" a 2nd thought before sending her out to go door-to-door trick or treatin' ...........

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/f/fd/New_York_Comic_Con_2013_-_Harley_Quinn_%2810275536896%29.jpg/320px-New_York_Comic_Con_2013_-_Harley_Quinn_%2810275536896%29.jpg)


 I mean who's to say some pedo creep wasn't going from full Clint Gran Torino into thinking....

"Hey, get the hell off my front law.....
  ............saaay, whadda we have here??....."

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/07/ClintEastwoodCannesMay08.jpg/180px-ClintEastwoodCannesMay08.jpg)

on a lighter, more evolved note:

Q:  why's halloween the favorite holliday in Appalachia?

A:  'cause they like to pump kin
I think my neighborhood had a good mix of the family-friendly and the macabre. We also had our fair share of MILFs dressed as Harley Quinn.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 04, 2022, 02:36:01 PM
I think my neighborhood had a good mix of the family-friendly and the macabre. We also had our fair share of MILFs dressed as Harley Quinn.
MILFS?  Fine, bring it.  It's when it's kiddy it's creepy.

Then there’s the Village Halloween Parade - always a trip lol.  Eat, drink and be Mary! 



Then there’s this fuckin creep - like a bad cold:

https://www.wsj.com/articles/donald-trump-prepares-to-launch-2024-campaign-11667586740

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 04, 2022, 04:11:23 PM
https://twitter.com/townhallcom/status/1588586757150298113

English-authored half a century ago:
https://genius.com/The-kinks-apeman-lyrics

#americanjournalism
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 05, 2022, 08:02:22 PM
But I thought it was drag shows that were doing the grooming.

 https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRxYCQCL/ (https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZTRxYCQCL/)

 https://www.foxnews.com/politics/south-dakota-gop-state-senate-hopeful-charged-child-abuse-after-allegedly-grooming-raping-family-member (https://www.foxnews.com/politics/south-dakota-gop-state-senate-hopeful-charged-child-abuse-after-allegedly-grooming-raping-family-member)

 https://nypost.com/2022/11/04/south-dakota-senate-candidate-joel-koskan-charged-with-felony-child-abuse/ (https://nypost.com/2022/11/04/south-dakota-senate-candidate-joel-koskan-charged-with-felony-child-abuse/)

 https://dakotafreepress.com/2022/11/03/koskan-accused-of-raping-daughter-for-years/ (https://dakotafreepress.com/2022/11/03/koskan-accused-of-raping-daughter-for-years/)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 06, 2022, 04:31:12 PM
Booooooooo

https://twitter.com/TeamsterRnF/status/1589270802926796801?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 06, 2022, 07:19:46 PM
Booooooooo

https://twitter.com/TeamsterRnF/status/1589270802926796801?s=19

"Hmm...this page doesn’t exist. Try searching for something else."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 06, 2022, 09:47:10 PM
"Hmm...this page doesn’t exist. Try searching for something else."
Labor Secretary Marty Walsh called for Congress to block railroad strikes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 07, 2022, 09:36:19 AM
Labor Secretary Marty Walsh called for Congress to block railroad strikes
Walsh may want to look at history namely the Pullman Strike, a turning point for US labor.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 07, 2022, 08:03:25 PM
At least Texas learned to tone it down after last time.

https://twitter.com/wcgroovy/status/1589708360076922880?t=dk0p-5LNUnHFiX4WR-muNA&s=19 (https://twitter.com/wcgroovy/status/1589708360076922880?t=dk0p-5LNUnHFiX4WR-muNA&s=19)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 08, 2022, 05:23:00 PM
NGL, watching those two raging bell ends publicly kicking the excrement out of each other would be hilarious.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/08/us/politics/trump-desantis-2024.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on November 08, 2022, 07:20:48 PM
NGL, watching those two raging bell ends publicly kicking the excrement out of each other would be hilarious.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/11/08/us/politics/trump-desantis-2024.html
DeSantis would be a fool not to run. He's clearly the top GOP prospect right now. I don't like him at all, but if his goal is to be president one day, you need to strike while the iron is hot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 08, 2022, 07:31:39 PM
DeSantis would be a fool not to run. He's clearly the top GOP prospect right now. I don't like him at all, but if his goal is to be president one day, you need to strike while the iron is hot.

Waiting for Trump to follow through on his threats to dump a bunch of dirt on DeSantis.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on November 08, 2022, 07:33:38 PM
Waiting for Trump to follow through on his threats to dump a bunch of dirt on DeSantis.
Does that even matter? Outside of our personal entertainment?

There's more dirt on Trump than anyone else who has ever run for president, and he still won. Nothing matters anymore. If DeSantis is smart, he realizes that. Plus, Trump is a bullshit artist, so it wouldn't be surprising at all if he's full of it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 08, 2022, 07:49:06 PM
Does that even matter? Outside of our personal entertainment?

There's more dirt on Trump than anyone else who has ever run for president, and he still won. Nothing matters anymore. If DeSantis is smart, he realizes that. Plus, Trump is a bullshit artist, so it wouldn't be surprising at all if he's full of it.

I was speaking solely for personal entertainment.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 08, 2022, 08:05:50 PM
I was speaking solely for personal entertainment.
hahaha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 08, 2022, 08:11:08 PM
Does that even matter? Outside of our personal entertainment?

There's more dirt on Trump than anyone else who has ever run for president, and he still won. Nothing matters anymore. If DeSantis is smart, he realizes that. Plus, Trump is a bullshit artist, so it wouldn't be surprising at all if he's full of it.
The difference is Trump is charismatic and DeSantis is just a dull turd.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on November 08, 2022, 08:22:29 PM
The difference is Trump is charismatic and DeSantis is just a dull turd.
Agreed. But for his political career, he will never become a more appealing candidate than right now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 08, 2022, 09:11:55 PM
Ronny D is currently the best governor in America. Cope.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 09, 2022, 06:22:28 AM
Ronny D is currently the best governor in America. Cope.
Best virtue signaler by far.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 10, 2022, 08:53:56 AM
Win or lose the house, McCarthy should invest in a food taster.

https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1590705372318248960?s=20&t=8kxk9YebVb8Y6ZCYPgaCkA (https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1590705372318248960?s=20&t=8kxk9YebVb8Y6ZCYPgaCkA)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 12, 2022, 11:24:18 AM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20221112/594535edced8e37812c96ec4d120bbbb.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 13, 2022, 08:51:07 AM
Inflation?  What inflation?…

https://www.balenciaga.com/en-us/men/shoes/sneakers


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 13, 2022, 10:34:30 AM
Inflation?  What inflation?…

https://www.balenciaga.com/en-us/men/shoes/sneakers
Chinese knockoffs still $25. #ThankYouXi
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 17, 2022, 09:00:49 AM
This guy sucks, the poster child for Democrats who try harder to beat their own progressives than they do Republicans.

https://twitter.com/tarapalmeri/status/1593253538012225537?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 17, 2022, 07:22:45 PM
https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1593357969084882944

LMAO, what a stupid bitch.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 18, 2022, 07:48:15 AM
This guy sucks, the poster child for Democrats who try harder to beat their own progressives than they do Republicans.

https://twitter.com/tarapalmeri/status/1593253538012225537?s=19
Do you mean Hakeem Jeffries, an election denier in his own right? : )

https://twitter.com/RepJeffries/status/964581721088897025
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 18, 2022, 09:00:25 AM
https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1593357969084882944

LMAO, what a stupid bitch.
She's right actually
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 18, 2022, 09:00:39 AM
Do you mean Hakeem Jeffries, an election denier in his own right? : )

https://twitter.com/RepJeffries/status/964581721088897025
Sure, but he's awful for a dozen other reasons.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 18, 2022, 09:00:50 AM
Fight fight fight

https://twitter.com/CatoInstitute/status/1593366970992394240?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 18, 2022, 10:56:31 AM
Fight fight fight

https://twitter.com/CatoInstitute/status/1593366970992394240?s=19

I  don't think any sane person would deny that MTG is a moron.

But I'm not going to pretend some kid with a Ba in political science is an expert on immigration and the opiod crisis.

I think the war on drugs in general is grossly exaggerated, but you can't deny a huge spike in bad things drug related since covid
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on November 18, 2022, 11:04:49 AM
https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1593357969084882944

LMAO, what a stupid bitch.

You do realize that reparations is not a punishment against you or other white Americans, right?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on November 18, 2022, 11:07:05 AM
I  don't think any sane person would deny that MTG is a moron.

But I'm not going to pretend some kid with a Ba in political science is an expert on immigration and the opiod crisis.

I think the war on drugs in general is grossly exaggerated, but you can't deny a huge spike in bad things drug related since covid

You can't take the border patrol statistics at face value either. They have a direct interest in inflating their effectiveness.

Also what the hell does this even mean?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 18, 2022, 11:11:32 AM
You can't take the border patrol statistics at face value either. They have a direct interest in inflating their effectiveness.

Also what the hell does this even mean?

I was trying to use vague language since I was too lazy to pull up statistics

But drug overdoses and abuse have absolutely skyrocketed the last few years
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 18, 2022, 11:11:37 AM
I  don't think any sane person would deny that MTG is a moron.

But I'm not going to pretend some kid with a Ba in political science is an expert on immigration and the opiod crisis.

I think the war on drugs in general is grossly exaggerated, but you can't deny a huge spike in bad things drug related since covid

"This data is inconvenient to the political position I've been telling everyone for years that I don't have, so I will be disregarding it."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 18, 2022, 11:12:18 AM
You do realize that reparations is not a punishment against you or other white Americans, right?

So if I took your money and gave it to someone else, what would you call that?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on November 18, 2022, 11:12:41 AM
So if I took your money and gave it to someone else, what would you call that?

Socialism, which I support.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on November 18, 2022, 11:14:38 AM
I was trying to use vague language since I was too lazy to pull up statistics

But drug overdoses and abuse have absolutely skyrocketed the last few years

https://drugabusestatistics.org/drug-overdose-deaths/

I agree there is absolutely a drug problem in the US. However, there are a multitude of causes. An insecure border is not root cause nor the issue to address.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 18, 2022, 11:14:46 AM
Socialism, which I support.

On the basis of skin color?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on November 18, 2022, 11:20:48 AM
So if I took your money and gave it to someone else, what would you call that?

Here is your quote, no mention of skin color. Cute try though.

If you don't understand this country has decades of institutional racism to address, I don't know what to tell you.

There are plenty (https://www.njisj.org/reparations_are_good_for_everyone) of studies (https://www.brookings.edu/policy2020/bigideas/why-we-need-reparations-for-black-americans/) out there to support reparations (https://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJMp2026170).
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on November 18, 2022, 02:50:18 PM
I was too lazy


We all kind of know this, but this is sweet, naive dcm in a milk chocolate covered nutshell.

Too lazy to make actual points, too lazy to defend his pretend beliefs, too lazy to even be a high-school-level troll.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 18, 2022, 03:11:16 PM
Quote from: Gorilla

Too lazy to make actual points, too lazy to defend his pretend beliefs, too lazy to even be a high-school-level troll.

https://cinegif.tumblr.com/post/89270072070/embed

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fYGqHGALXLk
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 18, 2022, 03:40:16 PM
We all kind of know this, but this is sweet, naive dcm in a milk chocolate covered nutshell.

Too lazy to make actual points, too lazy to defend his pretend beliefs, too lazy to even be a high-school-level troll.

Take a look at almost every political argument on here.

excrement gets way too freaking heated and personal. And I feel like that's fairly common for most political arguments with people who have fairly strong opinions.

I come on here because I like the Jets. Sometimes I'll take the bait, and quickly realize it's not worth it. I don't want to be an poopchute to anyone, and I certainly don't want to deal with it.

I'm okay with occasionally being obnoxious and retarded, taking my licks, and then leaving it there
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on November 18, 2022, 04:17:36 PM
Take a look at almost every political argument on here.

excrement gets way too freaking heated and personal. And I feel like that's fairly common for most political arguments with people who have fairly strong opinions.

I come on here because I like the Jets. Sometimes I'll take the bait, and quickly realize it's not worth it. I don't want to be an poopchute to anyone, and I certainly don't want to deal with it.

I'm okay with occasionally being obnoxious and retarded, taking my licks, and then leaving it there

I assure you I don't get as heated as people perceive. I enjoy having a discord with people on the opposite side. Especially when they have actual facts to back up their station.

I may not change my position but it's good, and important, to understand their perspective.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 18, 2022, 04:25:43 PM
Take a look at almost every political argument on here.

excrement gets way too freaking heated and personal. And I feel like that's fairly common for most political arguments with people who have fairly strong opinions.

I come on here because I like the Jets. Sometimes I'll take the bait, and quickly realize it's not worth it. I don't want to be an poopchute to anyone, and I certainly don't want to deal with it.

I'm okay with occasionally being obnoxious and retarded, taking my licks, and then leaving it there

Never take it seriously dcm.  There are people who treat 'like-minded' politicians as celebrities-imagine.  There are bigoted, hyper-partisan zealots in the media who obsequiously ball (or clit) wash them at every turn-imagine: *journalists*.  There are our 'one side of the aisle' political leaders claiming the high moral ground yet in the very next breath caustically generalizing about 'those on the other side of the aisle'.  Hell I've even read here in JO-ville where some have cut ties with family members because they don't share the same political worldview.  The freak?

Take the reparations issue: I've no problem with it and I have my reasons for it.  At the same time I also reserve the right to, well, ....

https://twitter.com/BlacksOrganize/status/1592787436601769991

no reason to make an issue out of a tissue.  Someone jumps ugly?  Respond in kind, or laugh at them.  "My way or the highway" types aren't worth the angst. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on November 18, 2022, 04:54:45 PM
Take a look at almost every political argument on here.

excrement gets way too freaking heated and personal. And I feel like that's fairly common for most political arguments with people who have fairly strong opinions.

I come on here because I like the Jets. Sometimes I'll take the bait, and quickly realize it's not worth it. I don't want to be an poopchute to anyone, and I certainly don't want to deal with it.

I'm okay with occasionally being obnoxious and retarded, taking my licks, and then leaving it there

I agree, make no mistake.

When i insinuate you are trolling, I seriously think I'm being generous and giving credit.
In the internet era, we all have our occasions of being "obnoxious and retarded"....hopefully more so online and minimally IRL.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 18, 2022, 06:03:57 PM
You do realize that reparations is not a punishment against you or other white Americans, right?

First of all, the central point of her words was that reparations would've helped bridge some sort of COVID divide, which is patently absurd.

Second of all, of course it is. I understand socialists think wealth and money are conjured out of thin air, but using public funds to cut a check to people on the basis of their skin color, A. lessons the pot for other social programs that would not only benefit other White Americans, but Asians, Hispanics etc, and B. specifically discriminates against those groups based on race.

Something like 3% of Black Americans were the descendants of slaves. My ancestry were busy on the boot making shoes and doing w/e else, they had absolutely nothing to do with slavery, Jim Crow etc.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 18, 2022, 06:04:54 PM
I agree, make no mistake.

When i insinuate you are trolling, I seriously think I'm being generous and giving credit.
In the internet era, we all have our occasions of being "obnoxious and retarded"....hopefully more so online and minimally IRL.

It is genuinely hilarious seeing how well people all get on IRL at the tailgate given the things they say to each other on here at times. It makes me think that just maybe there's a bunch of online personas going on.

You should come to one and see for yourself.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 18, 2022, 06:05:45 PM
First of all, the central point of her words was that reparations would've helped bridge some sort of COVID divide, which is patently absurd.

Second of all, of course it is. I understand socialists think wealth and money are conjured out of thin air, but using public funds to cut a check to people on the basis of their skin color, A. lessons the pot for other social programs that would not only benefit other White Americans, but Asians, Hispanics etc, and B. specifically discriminates against those groups based on race.

Something like 3% of Black Americans were the descendants of slaves. My ancestry were busy on the boot making shoes and doing w/e else, they had absolutely nothing to do with slavery, Jim Crow etc.

I have a really bold idea. How about taking it out of the pot used to subsidise corporations and billionaires?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 18, 2022, 06:14:36 PM
It is genuinely hilarious seeing how well people all get on IRL at the tailgate given the things they say to each other on here at times. It makes me think that just maybe there's a bunch of online personas going on.

You should come to one and see for yourself.

I was just going to say, I had a blast at the tailgate hanging out with people I certainly mix it up with from time to time on here politically, but at the same time JE you've never taken it to a serious personal level. I'm just being honest, I don't know how I'd react towards someone who wished COVID at a time people were dying in large numbers from it on me and mine.

I have a really bold idea. How about taking it out of the pot used to subsidise corporations and billionaires?

Why should an entire 13 percent of the population get a check when 10 percent of said population doesn't have ancestry that were slaves?

Solve the homeless vet crisis, solve infrastructure issues on places like LI where poor people are just totally SIL in terms of using public transpo, or in places like the rural midwest where they have no high speed wifi, etc etc. Then idk, maybe. I still find it fundamentally unfair. And it has nothing to do with BeInG tHrEaTeNeD bEcAuSe ItS pUnIsHiNg wHiTeS. Affirmative action in essence punished whites (though moreso asians). I understood the need for it, with the caveat that it was never supposed to be a permanent solution.

On a much different topic; as much as I think student loan forgiveness is a suckers gambit considering it only emboldens universities and predatory lenders to continue to overcharge impressionable youngens on tuition while juicing them at a rate a loanshark would blush at because they know a government bailout is coming, I'd much rather see us spend the money we just handed Zelensky on our own youth.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 18, 2022, 06:21:52 PM
Solve the homeless vet crisis, solve infrastructure issues on places like LI where poor people are just totally SIL in terms of using public transpo, or in places like the rural midwest where they have no high speed wifi, etc etc.

I feel like a lot of people would vote for a party actually committed to doing things like that.

On a much different topic; as much as I think student loan forgiveness is a suckers gambit considering it only emboldens universities and predatory lenders to continue to overcharge impressionable youngens on tuition

Didn't you vote for someone who did pretty much exactly that to be President?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 18, 2022, 06:25:31 PM
I feel like a lot of people would vote for a party actually committed to doing things like that.

Didn't you vote for someone who did pretty much exactly that to be President?

Trump issued out loans to young people for a wildly overpriced product at a 9 percent interest rate that you can't discharge in bankruptcy?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 18, 2022, 06:31:38 PM
Trump issued out loans to young people for a wildly overpriced product at a 9 percent interest rate that you can't discharge in bankruptcy?



No, he merely sold fraudulent education promises to people who absolutely all had the cash laying around in their bank accounts to pay for the courses he was promising. Obviously a very different thing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 18, 2022, 06:35:12 PM
No, he merely sold fraudulent education promises to people who absolutely all had the cash laying around in their bank accounts to pay for the courses he was promising. Obviously a very different thing.

I'd say there's a slight difference in the societal pressure (and cost) re: Trump university vs. accredited colleges and universities.

And that's not defending the absolute failure that was Trump U, but no one's told "hey you need to go to trump university to make anything out of yourself" whereas guidance/career counselors are swearing to that senior in high school that he better go to college next year or he'll end up an unemployed townie his whole life.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on November 18, 2022, 11:34:35 PM
Something like 3% of Black Americans were the descendants of slaves. My ancestry were busy on the boot making shoes and doing w/e else, they had absolutely nothing to do with slavery, Jim Crow etc.

I'd be fascinated to see a source on this; my understanding was that for a significant percentage of black Americans genealogy is incredibly difficult to track due the lack of substantive records for black families during the 1800s and into the early 1900s.

Regardless, black people have been distinctively treated poorly in ways that substantively impact generational wealth through by both private and government bodies, especially around housing, education, healthcare, and social security, for well over a century following the end of slavery. It seems evident that black Americans have materially more difficult and shorter lives than white people in this country as a result of historic structural inequity. Helping alleviate those disparities seems good to me, but I'd always love to hear more elegant solutions than reparations.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on November 19, 2022, 04:15:36 PM
I'd say there's a slight difference in the societal pressure (and cost) re: Trump university vs. accredited colleges and universities.

And that's not defending the absolute failure that was Trump U, but no one's told "hey you need to go to trump university to make anything out of yourself" whereas guidance/career counselors are swearing to that senior in high school that he better go to college next year or he'll end up an unemployed townie his whole life.

You'd say there's a "slight difference".
Trump and Trump U, make no mistake, are INDEFENSIBLE. A disgusting, immoral scam. A college degree and it's associated "societal pressure" exist, in part, because a degree statistically helps you earn more while working less in your lifetime.
Conversely, spending time and your money on Trump U and other types of gross, predatory scams result in 99.999% of "students" being fucked out of their money by a freaking piece of excrement. Trump knew it was a scam and a grift, because he is a grifter. Anyone who thinks otherwise is potentially more money in his pocket.

Guidance counselors  "swearing to that senior in high school that he better go to college next year or he'll end up an unemployed townie his whole life", first of all is an exaggeration (you know that), but again they would not be doing their job if they did not encourage goal of higher education.
And take a look at Trump U advertisements and similar scams if you don't think they make worse, ridiculously more unfounded, asinine, grandiose claims.

"No one's told 'hey you need to go to trump university to make anything out of yourself'".....yeah, except for tons of uneducated people who sadly trusted the greasy freak in the McDonald's commercial and the Apprentice.

Yes, the price is different, and a legitimate degree in this country could take years to pay off (if you didn't pull your red-blooded American bootstraps up and get a scholarship)....but that's better than being robbed of thousands of dollars for a bag of magic rat turds by the crackhead behind 7-11.  So we do agree, Trump U was an absolute failure. It was a failure at decency and honesty and was a middle finger cash-grab.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 23, 2022, 08:13:30 AM
So if I took your money and gave it to someone else, what would you call that?
I'd call it something you made up that doesn't need to be taken seriously.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 23, 2022, 08:15:07 AM


First of all, the central point of her words was that reparations would've helped bridge some sort of COVID divide, which is patently absurd.

Wrong
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 27, 2022, 03:43:54 PM
Terminal brainworms

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20221127/229aa54cc2e69c6f15501a392f2aebea.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 28, 2022, 05:08:50 PM
I can't decide if it would be funnier for him to win or to lose.

https://www.businessinsider.com/mike-lindell-running-rnc-chair-unseat-ronna-mcdaniel-2022-11

I assume that it's voted for by party apparatchiks, in which case I'd expect him to lose handily given the party appears to be trying to move on from Trump.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 29, 2022, 10:18:58 AM
Marco Rubio says he'll do ONE damn decent thing for a change and blue MAGA is upset

Obviously Rubio's framing and motivation here are shady but it's ultimately correct to not allow Congress to impose a deal on the rail workers.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20221129/e9cef42fb55c61f92531756070a9e558.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 29, 2022, 10:24:55 AM
Poor rail workers will only get a 24% raise

Cruel cruel world
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 29, 2022, 10:30:36 AM
Poor rail workers will only get a 24% raise

Cruel cruel world
Yeah, that might get them a bit closer to matching the value they create.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 29, 2022, 10:34:41 AM
It is genuinely hilarious seeing how well people all get on IRL at the tailgate given the things they say to each other on here at times. It makes me think that just maybe there's a bunch of online personas going on.

You should come to one and see for yourself.

As a Cheese Dust supporter, I stand behind this statement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 29, 2022, 10:52:40 AM
Yeah, that might get them a bit closer to matching the value they create.

You can make that argument for probably 99% of the working country


That doesn't give you the right to hold the country hostage
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 29, 2022, 11:08:29 AM


You can make that argument for probably 99% of the working country

Exactly.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on November 29, 2022, 11:09:48 AM
You can make that argument for probably 99% of the working country


That doesn't give you the right to hold the country hostage

Do you season the boot or prefer the natural flavor?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 29, 2022, 11:17:14 AM
Do you season the boot or prefer the natural flavor?
If bootmakers go on strike he'll starve. :(
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 29, 2022, 11:45:32 AM
"Broken by federal troops in early August..."    

don't have history repeat itself
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e6/Great_Railroad_Strike_plaque%2C_Baltimore_01_%28cropped%29.jpg/593px-Great_Railroad_Strike_plaque%2C_Baltimore_01_%28cropped%29.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/b6/Leimbacher_Gasthof_Blockade_2007-10-31.jpg/640px-Leimbacher_Gasthof_Blockade_2007-10-31.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on November 29, 2022, 11:54:48 AM
Always fun to see those who want government expanded to levels not yet seen in this country calling others a bootlicker.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on November 29, 2022, 12:00:13 PM
Those that don't know history (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Railroad_Strike_of_1877) are doomed to repeat it. (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Great_Railroad_Strike_of_1922)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on November 29, 2022, 12:01:43 PM
Always fun to see those who want government expanded to levels not yet seen in this country calling others a bootlicker.

Explain to me how supporting those fighting for a living wage is asking for government expansion?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on November 29, 2022, 12:04:12 PM
You can make that argument for probably 99% of the working country


#selfawarewolves
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 29, 2022, 12:26:40 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/0b/Vesey_Hope_%2850864686461%29.jpg/320px-Vesey_Hope_%2850864686461%29.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/92/Total_reconstruction_of_Neunkirchen_station_%28138%29.jpg/320px-Total_reconstruction_of_Neunkirchen_station_%28138%29.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2c/Portrait_of_a_track_worker_%283476910152%29.jpg/320px-Portrait_of_a_track_worker_%283476910152%29.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 29, 2022, 03:54:07 PM
Their biggest contention is having 30 days of paid leave per year that they have to schedule months in advance.

They don't get holidays off, that 30 days is all they get.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 29, 2022, 04:25:42 PM
The dirty dozen

https://www.businessinsider.com/which-republican-senators-vote-for-same-sex-marriage-codification-bill-2022-11
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 29, 2022, 04:58:03 PM
Their biggest contention is having 30 days of paid leave per year that they have to schedule months in advance.

They don't get holidays off, that 30 days is all they get.



That's more than HCWs get

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 29, 2022, 05:04:20 PM
That's more than HCWs get



If you are upset that it's all you get then you should probably do something about it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on November 29, 2022, 05:07:56 PM
That's more than HCWs get



The conservative mindset is "why should they get more than me" rather than "why don't we all get what we need."

I had a conversation with a Trumpster and his argument was "But I did well under Trump, so he must be a good president." It's baffling. Continue to vote against your best interest in fear that someone else may get a piece of the pie.

Dumbass.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 30, 2022, 07:30:07 AM
The conservative mindset is "why should they get more than me" rather than "why don't we all get what we need."

I had a conversation with a Trumpster and his argument was "But I did well under Trump, so he must be a good president." It's baffling. Continue to vote against your best interest in fear that someone else may get a piece of the pie.

Dumbass.
Funny how the "toughen up, life isn't fair" crowd is so quick to complain "but I'm not getting help so why should other people?"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on November 30, 2022, 07:32:21 AM
The issue isn't who gets what

It's if I don't get what I want, I'm going to freak the entire country.

Imagine if during covid the largest union for HCWs was like yup if you don't give us everything we want, we're all going on strike next week and the rest of yall can go freak yourselves.

That's essentially what this is, holding the entire country hostage
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 30, 2022, 07:47:12 AM


It's if I don't get what I want, I'm going to freak the entire country.

That's already the default setting for business owners.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on November 30, 2022, 08:34:19 AM
The issue isn't who gets what

It's if I don't get what I want, I'm going to freak the entire country.

Imagine if during covid the largest union for HCWs was like yup if you don't give us everything we want, we're all going on strike next week and the rest of yall can go freak yourselves.

That's essentially what this is, holding the entire country hostage
First, you keep mentioning HCWs when they’re the most selfless group possible. They ABSOLUTELY should get more but they’re not in it to have an easy life.

Second, your frustration is displaced. Capitalism, by design, doesn’t give the power to the worker. They have exactly one play and that’s to simply not work. They’re making their play.

If you don’t like it, show your anger towards the millionaires. Not the wage worker struggling with inflation and whether to get life saving medicine or food this week.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 30, 2022, 10:56:32 AM
https://abovethelaw.com/2022/11/supreme-court-concerned-that-bribery-law-might-prevent-their-friends-from-taking-bribes/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on November 30, 2022, 12:07:10 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e1/Danish_train_strike.jpg)

yo joey union buster and busty nancy: simply include standard paid sick day provisions and be done with it..

https://www.cp-texas.org

"It is in the class struggle that the proletariat comes to disentangle and confront the relations of forces in which it is enmeshed, and succeeds in defining the power of its struggle.."   ....yawn....
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 01, 2022, 06:58:41 AM
(https://i.redd.it/rv1wfk6jh83a1.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 01, 2022, 07:07:49 PM
Strange bedfellows

Edit: I forgot to include the link

https://twitter.com/MorePerfectUS/status/1598429257965113344?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 01, 2022, 08:36:35 PM
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-judiciary-republicans-delete-kanye-elon-trump-tweet-rapper-prais-rcna59654

I thought embarrassing Republican tweets were supposed to be done with after Trump was booted?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 01, 2022, 09:04:18 PM
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/house-judiciary-republicans-delete-kanye-elon-trump-tweet-rapper-prais-rcna59654

I thought embarrassing Republican tweets were supposed to be done with after Trump was booted?
It's funny that it stayed up as long as it did.

Also,

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20221202/5c8c2601540bd53752dd3d8283969d5f.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 04, 2022, 10:37:47 PM
Well now. This is slightly inconvenient.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfAwarewolves/comments/zce260/desantis_lawyers_define_woke_as_belief_that_there/

Can they not ask Judge Cannon for a bit of help?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 05, 2022, 02:03:22 AM
Well now. This is slightly inconvenient.

https://www.reddit.com/r/SelfAwarewolves/comments/zce260/desantis_lawyers_define_woke_as_belief_that_there/

Can they not ask Judge Cannon for a bit of help?

Not particularly, this is your standard someone taking something out of context because internet reddit lulz

The TLDR is that this was a trial over a prosecutor who got suspended because DeSantis claimed he wasn't doing his job on matters motivated by political ideology. So during the trial they were asked to define woke and they essentially said the above quote but also included that this made them (woke people) feel that they don't have to enforce the laws for that reason (ie they suggest a woke person thinks because there's system and racial injustice, that people shouldn't get prosecuted for actual crimes they committed. In this case the guy fired was an attorney, thus this is all highly relevant)

Obviously the entire thing on DeSantis side is 10000% politically motivated as this excrement always is. But still this is your typical reddit Twitter manufactured outrage.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 05, 2022, 10:54:27 AM
Not particularly, this is your standard someone taking something out of context because internet reddit lulz

The TLDR is that this was a trial over a prosecutor who got suspended because DeSantis claimed he wasn't doing his job on matters motivated by political ideology. So during the trial they were asked to define woke and they essentially said the above quote but also included that this made them (woke people) feel that they don't have to enforce the laws for that reason (ie they suggest a woke person thinks because there's system and racial injustice, that people shouldn't get prosecuted for actual crimes they committed. In this case the guy fired was an attorney, thus this is all highly relevant)

Obviously the entire thing on DeSantis side is 10000% politically motivated as this excrement always is. But still this is your typical reddit Twitter manufactured outrage.

No, this is the lawyer representing a conservative position being asked to define exactly what it is that they're trying to legislate against, him doing so quite effectively, and in the process laying bare the utter cuntiness of their essential position.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 05, 2022, 12:34:53 PM
No, this is the lawyer representing a conservative position being asked to define exactly what it is that they're trying to legislate against, him doing so quite effectively, and in the process laying bare the utter cuntiness of their essential position.

https://floridapolitics.com/archives/574045-in-andrew-warren-suspension-trial-gov-desantis-officials-answer-what-does-woke-mean/

There's not exactly many articles on this particular quote

Mostly just this one and some crazy feminist blogger
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 05, 2022, 12:54:15 PM
https://floridapolitics.com/archives/574045-in-andrew-warren-suspension-trial-gov-desantis-officials-answer-what-does-woke-mean/

There's not exactly many articles on this particular quote

Mostly just this one and some crazy feminist blogger

I don't care who is or isn't reporting it. It's a specific quote from a specific lawyer, in court, representing the party railing against "woke".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on December 05, 2022, 02:08:21 PM
The nuance of what woke means is hardly the issue. I agree that it is being used as an "LOLGOP."

Which is an exercise of futility. Wait 10 minutes and the GOP will provide more fodder.

The bigger issue is DeSantis abused his powers by suspending an attorney he disagreed with on politics.

freak DeSantis and freak the GOP.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 05, 2022, 02:15:41 PM
Might as well ask for a legal definition of "cool"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 05, 2022, 02:18:00 PM
Might as well ask for a legal definition of "cool"

(https://thumbs.gfycat.com/IllegalWatchfulCockroach-size_restricted.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 05, 2022, 03:01:13 PM
Might as well ask for a legal definition of "cool"

Except the point is that they're admitting that either they're enacting legislation to prevent people recognising and acting on "systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them", or to prevent people believing and promoting that opinion. Those are both very troublesome concepts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 05, 2022, 05:32:39 PM
Except the point is that they're admitting that either they're enacting legislation to prevent people recognising and acting on "systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them", or to prevent people believing and promoting that opinion. Those are both very troublesome concepts.

Honestly I wasn't going to comment again until you commented again.

But you literally didn't read the article.

You can make the argument that they don't believe those things exist (because the article does state as much)

But what you say is patently false.

This is literally entirely about a lawyer getting suspended because they felt certain people should not get charged with crimes because they believe in systematic injustices etc etc etc

You're literally cherry picking a piece of a quote and ignoring the entire context of it

And don't get me wrong I'm not defending the whole politics of this thing. There's a million valid arguments you can make about this whole situation. But you're choosing to harp on the wrong one
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 05, 2022, 06:01:05 PM
Honestly I wasn't going to comment again until you commented again.

But you literally didn't read the article.

You can make the argument that they don't believe those things exist (because the article does state as much)

But what you say is patently false.

This is literally entirely about a lawyer getting suspended because they felt certain people should not get charged with crimes because they believe in systematic injustices etc etc etc

You're literally cherry picking a piece of a quote and ignoring the entire context of it

And don't get me wrong I'm not defending the whole politics of this thing. There's a million valid arguments you can make about this whole situation. But you're choosing to harp on the wrong one

I think you're trying to read far too much into this, and make it more complex than it is. I'm only really interested in one key fact here, which is that the official legal representative for Ron De Santis and his government was asked to define "woke", given it's a term that they have specifically used both in legislation, and in their justification for firing Warren. He define "woke" as follows:

Quote
“To me it means someone who believes that there are systemic injustices in the criminal justice system and on that basis they can decline to fully enforce and uphold the law,” Newman said.

Asked what “woke” means more generally, Newman said “it would be the belief there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them.

We are at least agreed that this is a matter of record, yes? That he is in fact the official legal representative of De Santis, and that he did in fact say this, and that this therefore is De Santis's view and by extension that of his government?

As long as we can agree on that, then my issue is that the legislation that they have enacted in direct opposition to this view (specifically the Stop Woke Act (https://www.flgov.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/12/Stop-Woke-Handout.pdf)) means that

- they do not believe that "there are systemic injustices in American society [or] the need to address them", or

- they are aware that "there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them" and they want those injustices to continue, or

- they are aware that "there are systemic injustices in American society and the need to address them" but it's inconvenient to do so and so they'd like people who do want to address them to shut up and stop addressing them, and they're willing to use the law to make them.

I don't know which of those it is, although I could hazard a guess, but they all seem hugely problematic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 05, 2022, 06:01:24 PM
Lol.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/05/trump-ex-advisor-john-bolton-says-considering-2024-presidential-bid.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 05, 2022, 06:55:19 PM
Lol.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/05/trump-ex-advisor-john-bolton-says-considering-2024-presidential-bid.html
He'd purely be there to try and kamikaze Trump. Let Bolton get down in the mud while the party's preferred candidate keeps their hands clean.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 05, 2022, 07:39:42 PM
Bolton Cheney?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on December 05, 2022, 07:48:31 PM
Lol.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/05/trump-ex-advisor-john-bolton-says-considering-2024-presidential-bid.html

The GOP needs to feed something to DeSantis\Trump machine.

I assume they'll rally around DeSantis but wouldn't surprise me at all if they lick Trump's taint again. Regardless they will sacrifice some nobodies to make it seem like they're more powerful than they are.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 05, 2022, 07:50:21 PM
Can't wait until we're celebrating the first italian President
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on December 05, 2022, 07:54:47 PM
Can't wait until we're celebrating the first italian President

Despite the glorious mustache, I don't think Bolton is Italian.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 05, 2022, 08:33:03 PM
Can't wait until we're celebrating the first italian President

Identity politics that would make Biden proud
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 05, 2022, 09:23:36 PM
Can't wait until we're celebrating the first italian President
even an Italian First Lady
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/0/00/Monica_Vitti_%281965%29_%28cropped%29_2_%28cropped%29.jpg/208px-Monica_Vitti_%281965%29_%28cropped%29_2_%28cropped%29.jpg)

(sorry, dr. jill''s eng/scot on mom's side)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/72/Jill_Biden%27s_Portrait.jpg/188px-Jill_Biden%27s_Portrait.jpg)


and you don't count First Bitch....go pwder yr nose...
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/85/Hunter_Biden_-_Caricature_%2851338712005%29.jpg/320px-Hunter_Biden_-_Caricature_%2851338712005%29.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 05, 2022, 10:34:31 PM
Despite the glorious mustache, I don't think Bolton is Italian.

JFC, I'm picturing John Bolton dropping a "boopitty boppitty" ala Peter Griffin trying to speak italian and now I'm laughing in bed.

Identity politics that would make Biden proud

It was a joke. Pelosi's Italian, you won't see me clamoring for her to run.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 06, 2022, 08:33:23 AM
Can't wait until we're celebrating the first italian President
President Alessandra Biaggi
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 06, 2022, 12:45:54 PM
Trying this again, let's see what happens

https://theintercept.com/2022/12/06/saudi-yemen-war-bernie-sanders/

SEN. BERNIE SANDERS is moving toward a vote “hopefully next week” on a war powers resolution aimed at blocking U.S. support for the Saudi-led war in Yemen, the Vermont senator told The Intercept on Monday.

An agreement for a ceasefire in Yemen between the Saudi-led alliance and the Houthis, who are backed by Iran, has expired, though both sides have tenuously maintained the peace. Backers of a war powers resolution say that a strong vote in the Senate in the lame duck will send a signal to Saudi Arabia that it does not have a free hand to restart hostilities, despite the Biden administration’s more placating posture amid its hunt for lower oil prices.

A war powers resolution is “privileged” in the Senate, which means that the sponsor of it can bring it to the floor for a vote without the need for approval by the chamber’s leadership once a certain amount of time has elapsed. At that point, the resolution has “ripened,” and the one sponsored by Sanders is now ripe.

Asked whether Sanders expected to have the votes to pass the resolution, Sanders said, “I think we do, yes.”

In 2019, Congress advanced a bipartisan version of the current Yemen war powers resolution, only to see it vetoed by President Donald Trump.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 07, 2022, 06:52:55 AM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-11510811/Girl-14-self-inflicted-knife-wounds-Senator-Ted-Cruzs-home.html

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 07, 2022, 06:57:29 AM
I hope she's OK and is receiving support, especially from her parents. This cannot be easy for any of them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 07, 2022, 07:42:36 AM
Oh excrement
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 07, 2022, 04:39:22 PM
Sad

https://www.mhanational.org/issues/2022/mental-health-america-youth-data
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 07, 2022, 06:24:26 PM
Sad

https://www.mhanational.org/issues/2022/mental-health-america-youth-data

It is, but I feel like that's a flawed study - it's ranking the prevalence of reporting, not of incidence.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 09, 2022, 06:50:35 AM
No excrement.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/09/politics/kyrsten-sinema-leaves-democratic-party/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 09, 2022, 07:22:22 AM
Apparently Ted Cruz stayed in Washington instead of going home to his daughter.  I wonder if she just didn't want him to be there or he's just a bigger piece of excrement than I thought (which is a huge task).  All speculation of course.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on December 09, 2022, 11:37:05 AM
Apparently Ted Cruz stayed in Washington instead of going home to his daughter.  I wonder if she just didn't want him to be there or he's just a bigger piece of excrement than I thought (which is a huge task).  All speculation of course.

I've gotten this call and the emotion I felt is indescribable. Nothing fuckin matters but getting to your kid. I was in Houston. The call came at 1am, I got to the airport at 1:30. The flight wasn't until 5am.

I didn't start crying or processing it until I was next to my kid. It was like someone else took over and I was on autopilot.

I couldn't imagine not going home. I couldn't imagine trying to focus on work or fuckin anything else.

This was 4 years ago and my kid is doing much better.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 09, 2022, 11:53:23 AM
I think its just horrible that some 14 year old girls business is national freaking news.

If someone you care about is going through severe mental issues the last thing anyone should freaking want is this disgusting media attention.

Ted Cruz is a public figure, give him your ire.

Don't do this excrement to little kids
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 09, 2022, 11:55:30 AM
No excrement.

https://www.cnn.com/2022/12/09/politics/kyrsten-sinema-leaves-democratic-party/index.html

Isn't Bernie an "independent"

It's just a label, though this is probably more about being a power play, than her actually being an independent
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on December 09, 2022, 11:59:02 AM
I think its just horrible that some 14 year old girls business is national freaking news.

If someone you care about is going through severe mental issues the last thing anyone should freaking want is this disgusting media attention.

Ted Cruz is a public figure, give him your ire.

Don't do this excrement to little kids

I agree, freak the media for publicizing this excrement.

However that excrement is out there and it's public record that Ted Cruz is still in DC. While I don't have first hand knowledge of his situation, I do have anecdotal experience as a parent. Most of us know how we'd handle this situation.

Also didn't Ted Cruz make fun of Biden the day before his son's funeral?

My point is Ted Cruz is a man of low character and has lost the benefit of the doubt years ago.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 09, 2022, 12:17:00 PM
Sinema switching to Independent is 100% about her election prospects in 2024.  As of now, she'd get smoked in her primary as a Democrat in her state. Being Independent gets her on the ballot for the election at least, and not out on her derriere in the primary.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on December 09, 2022, 12:19:42 PM
Sinema switching to Independent is 100% about her election prospects in 2024.  As of now, she'd get smoked in her primary as a democrat in her state.

(https://i.imgur.com/8KprSC2.jpg)

freak Sinema.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 09, 2022, 01:49:31 PM
Amazing the treatment one certain maverick from Arizona gets versus another.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 09, 2022, 01:51:19 PM
Amazing the treatment one certain maverick from Arizona gets versus another.
John McCain is probably in hell
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 09, 2022, 02:20:09 PM
John McCain is probably in hell

Fact check: True.

But you'd never know it from the absolute fawning that was done on his behalf. Post 2008 of course.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 09, 2022, 02:21:43 PM
John McCain is probably in hell

I thought bombing Asian kids was God’s work?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on December 09, 2022, 02:27:19 PM
I thought bombing Asian kids was God’s work?

I've been doing it for fun, you mean this will get me into heaven too?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 09, 2022, 10:24:53 PM
“Voting is a sham”

-14 year old me
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 11, 2022, 06:37:09 PM
At some point someone should probably start asking questions about whether this woman should be allowed to serve.

https://www.newsweek.com/marjorie-taylor-greene-says-maga-wouldve-won-jan-6-if-she-organized-it-1766215
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 13, 2022, 04:01:21 PM
Posting this mainly to state how much I despise backronyms.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/13/lawmakers-unveil-bipartisan-bill-that-aims-to-ban-tiktok-in-the-us.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 13, 2022, 04:16:15 PM
Posting this mainly to state how much I despise backronyms.

https://www.cnbc.com/2022/12/13/lawmakers-unveil-bipartisan-bill-that-aims-to-ban-tiktok-in-the-us.html

That is so bad. It's not even marketable.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 13, 2022, 04:17:48 PM
I just find it ironic that this sounds exactly like something China would do
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 13, 2022, 04:24:32 PM
That is so bad. It's not even marketable.
It doesn't have to pass, it just needs to virtue signal that they're trying to keep muricans safe from evil foreigners.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 13, 2022, 04:29:10 PM
The kids are all about BeReal now anyway, or so I'm told.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 13, 2022, 04:32:18 PM
The kids are all about BeReal now anyway, or so I'm told.
A FRENCH PLOT TO STEAL OUR DATAS AND GROOM ARE KIDS
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 13, 2022, 04:33:08 PM
A FRENCH PLOT TO STEAL OUR DATAS AND GROOM ARE KIDS

I'm pretty sure that the kind of people who use these apps don't have any data worth stealing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 13, 2022, 05:19:32 PM
https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1602776428625510407?s=20&t=YF2dKvNJEK_tbFW-WIyyrw (https://twitter.com/RonFilipkowski/status/1602776428625510407?s=20&t=YF2dKvNJEK_tbFW-WIyyrw)

The Pats should have cut Brady after 2007.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 14, 2022, 12:04:41 AM

freak Sinema.

 In   a   heartbeat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on December 14, 2022, 09:21:09 AM
In   a   heartbeat.

(https://i.imgur.com/y08YbdM.png)

I bet it'd be the driest blowjob you have ever received.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 14, 2022, 09:38:03 AM
I don't think she would care to try.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 14, 2022, 10:18:03 AM
She looks like her nose comes off when she removes the glasses.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on December 14, 2022, 10:19:06 AM
She looks like her nose comes off when she removes the glasses.

hahahahahahahahahahaha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on December 14, 2022, 10:22:08 AM
She looks like her nose comes off when she removes the glasses.

lol!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 15, 2022, 12:55:51 PM
(https://i.imgur.com/y08YbdM.png)

I bet it'd be the driest blowjob you have ever received.
Who’s talking arid BJs?  Browntown & stops in between
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 16, 2022, 01:41:37 PM
Tom Cotton loves free speech

https://twitter.com/ryangrim/status/1603818745134288896?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 16, 2022, 10:20:40 PM
https://twitter.com/jessicavalenti/status/1603805360514637824?s=46&t=oUiyC8W78W_FI45H8bUTAw

The year is 2022
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 17, 2022, 12:21:42 PM
https://twitter.com/jessicavalenti/status/1603805360514637824?s=46&t=oUiyC8W78W_FI45H8bUTAw

The year is 2022
Unfortunately we must maintain the "domestic supply of infants."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 17, 2022, 12:21:54 PM
Dunno how I missed this one.

https://twitter.com/OrganizerMemes/status/1540139619299123201?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 17, 2022, 09:30:32 PM
Dumb AG

https://twitter.com/AGAshleyMoody/status/1603866188924198912?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 18, 2022, 01:06:31 AM
https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status/1604284089934270464?t=536oH1dCBEA7RVnzttSETA&s=19 (https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status/1604284089934270464?t=536oH1dCBEA7RVnzttSETA&s=19)

LOL
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 18, 2022, 05:38:56 AM
https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status/1604284089934270464?t=536oH1dCBEA7RVnzttSETA&s=19 (https://twitter.com/NoLieWithBTC/status/1604284089934270464?t=536oH1dCBEA7RVnzttSETA&s=19)

LOL

https://tenor.com/view/dancing-old-couple-get-low-gif-11348851
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 19, 2022, 01:50:59 PM
https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2022/12/gay-maga-congressman-elect-george-santos-allegedly-lied-entire-past/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 19, 2022, 01:54:12 PM
Guys, check in your wives' and girlfriends' nightstands and bathroom cabinets in case they're a pedophile.

https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1604158248449282048
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 19, 2022, 02:05:45 PM
Trafficking dying immigrants to NYC to own the libs

https://twitter.com/erinmdurkin/status/1604900357011869696?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on December 19, 2022, 04:44:24 PM
Guys, check in your wives' and girlfriends' nightstands and bathroom cabinets in case they're a pedophile.

https://twitter.com/RepMTG/status/1604158248449282048

Quote
They’re extremely upset and absolutely horrified that sex toys are being sold openly right next to children’s toothbrushes!

This is grooming.

This is almost a very dry, witty double entendre that I'm sure Marge intended. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 20, 2022, 01:14:16 PM
Dumb AG

https://twitter.com/AGAshleyMoody/status/1603866188924198912?s=19

Dumb daddy

https://www.ksbw.com/amp/article/california-dad-arrested-after-girl-2-overdoses-on-fentanyl/42297358
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 20, 2022, 03:27:39 PM
Fight fight fight

https://www.businessinsider.com/mtg-rips-into-lauren-boebert-twitter-over-space-lasers-jab-2022-12
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 20, 2022, 04:23:24 PM
Fight fight fight

https://www.businessinsider.com/mtg-rips-into-lauren-boebert-twitter-over-space-lasers-jab-2022-12

Funny but not hugely surprising. It feels like Greene is in an awkward spot right now, she's trying to ensure she has a long career which means extricating herself from the imploding MAGA movement while not being seen to turn her back on the shitstains that put her there. I feel like Boebert is somewhat less calculating and just happy to ride the gravy train that she has accidentally managed to fall well-sculpted derriere first onto for as long as possible.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 20, 2022, 07:34:42 PM
Important issues first. 

Worse hair: Jamie Raskin or Rand Paul? Raskin looks like a black sheep took a excrement on his head.  Rand Paul looks like he ripped off his scrotum and glued it to his head.  Discuss.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 20, 2022, 11:50:20 PM
https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1605301253952589824?s=46&t=9CeuTXWBuNGE_aKKp9DfMw

Lol Mitch Pelosi
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 21, 2022, 06:29:37 AM
Important issues first. 

Worse hair: Jamie Raskin or Rand Paul? Raskin looks like a black sheep took a excrement on his head.  Rand Paul looks like he ripped off his scrotum and glued it to his head.  Discuss.
Akin to who’d you rather bang, Lens Dunham or ’Whole lotta Rosie’?

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/24/Jamie_Raskin_%2830620205935%29.jpg/162px-Jamie_Raskin_%2830620205935%29.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/63/Rand_Paul.jpg/160px-Rand_Paul.jpg)
Raskin’s thatch looks like you could clean your golf spikes on them.  Slight ‘worse’ edge to Raskin.


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 21, 2022, 10:35:40 AM
https://twitter.com/drjasonnichols/status/1604949777409515521?s=46&t=bRD3TizF2YczxH7Pw9xeLw

Puck’s Long Island
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 21, 2022, 06:44:24 PM
https://twitter.com/drjasonnichols/status/1604949777409515521?s=46&t=bRD3TizF2YczxH7Pw9xeLw

Puck’s Long Island
Seems the GOP Queer’s from Queens     : ) 

https://twitter.com/Santos4Congress
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 24, 2022, 12:11:04 AM
https://twitter.com/AssBoss80085/status/1606457994757144578?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 26, 2022, 07:47:25 PM
“I never claimed to be Jewish,” Santos said. “I am Catholic. Because I learned my maternal family had a Jewish background I said I was `Jew-ish.'”

https://nypost.com/2022/12/26/rep-elect-george-santos-admits-fabricating-key-details-of-his-bio/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 27, 2022, 10:55:25 AM
“I never claimed to be Jewish,” Santos said. “I am Catholic. Because I learned my maternal family had a Jewish background I said I was `Jew-ish.'”

https://nypost.com/2022/12/26/rep-elect-george-santos-admits-fabricating-key-details-of-his-bio/

http://www.thejetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,135.msg481345.html#msg481345

Santos lies like a rug alright but this morning on MSNBC (Morning Joe minus ‘Joe’ and sidekick) within the first 10 minutes of the show they plastered the screen with two separate NY Post articles related to two separate stories…kinda amusing they’d use that dumbest of rags..

j/k
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on December 27, 2022, 11:05:24 AM
http://www.thejetoffensive.com/index.php/topic,135.msg481345.html#msg481345

Santos lies like a rug alright but this morning on MSNBC (Morning Joe minus ‘Joe’ and sidekick) within the first 10 minutes of the show they plastered the screen with two separate NY Post articles related to two separate stories…kinda amusing they’d use that dumbest of rags..

j/k

I'm convinced the only people that actually watch MSNBC do so in order to feed their hate boner.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 27, 2022, 11:06:58 AM
I'm convinced the only people that actually watch MSNBC do so in order to feed their hate boner.
It's for people who got their dick caught in the Overton window and are too ashamed to call someone for help.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 27, 2022, 02:45:58 PM
I'm convinced the only people that actually watch MSNBC do so in order to feed their hate boner.
It's for people who got their dick caught in the Overton window and are too ashamed to call someone for help.

May the Holiday season fill your homes with joy, your heart with love and your lives with dick

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/43/Penis_tree_Amazon_Peru.jpg/640px-Penis_tree_Amazon_Peru.jpg)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on December 29, 2022, 08:54:49 AM
Hang tough man,  hang tough

https://twitter.com/RepRaskin/status/1608261387821645824
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 03, 2023, 09:33:18 AM
The fact that he's going to brazen this out and that the party of which he is a member and a representative is going to allow him to is quite, quite remarkable.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/03/opinion/george-santos-congress.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 03, 2023, 10:54:37 AM
The fact that he's going to brazen this out and that the party of which he is a member and a representative is going to allow him to is quite, quite remarkable.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/03/opinion/george-santos-congress.html
All he has to do is embarrass them less than Madison Cawthorn and they'll tolerate him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 03, 2023, 12:11:33 PM
All he has to do is embarrass them less than Madison Cawthorn and they'll tolerate him.
About Madison Cawthorn: a letter complaining of his predatory sexual behavior reached 150 signatures at Parrick Henry College, a college of only 380 students. 

Don’t they have stairs there?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 03, 2023, 02:47:36 PM
About Madison Cawthorn: a letter complaining of his predatory sexual behavior reached 150 signatures at Parrick Henry College, a college of only 380 students. 

Don’t they have stairs there?
Maybe the entire school was built ranch-style.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 03, 2023, 03:06:46 PM
George Santos seems like a gift that will keep giving.

https://twitter.com/MacFarlaneNews/status/1610314687249358848?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 03, 2023, 03:09:37 PM
George Santos seems like a gift that will keep giving.

https://twitter.com/MacFarlaneNews/status/1610314687249358848?s=19

I don't know how laughing at everything he says in front of Congress won't be the default reaction of anyone in the room.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 03, 2023, 03:16:28 PM
I don't know how laughing at everything he says in front of Congress won't be the default reaction of anyone in the room.
https://youtu.be/4zcEQtG_Ugo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 04, 2023, 06:19:57 AM
George Santos seems like a gift that will keep giving.

https://twitter.com/MacFarlaneNews/status/1610314687249358848?s=19
“While SPEEDING ahead of reporters?”  Speeding??   While I get that Santos is the current in vogue dartboard for good reason, for a major network correspondent to lampoon the poor sap who did nothing more then hit a dead end in the labyrinth of a huge building he was new to is kinda small potatoes….  speaking of which … vvv

And he’s wearing a sweater?!!!!!
https://twitter.com/natsechobbyist/status/1610331093433200642





 

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 04, 2023, 09:39:29 AM
Watching Kevin McCarthy sell his soul, pride, ethics, and pretty much anything that isn't nailed down to become Speaker of the House....to have it in his grasp, only to have it snatched away because he's having to lie in the bed he made and "can't be trusted" by a bunch of kids he allowed to run the playground.....it's pretty hilarious.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 04, 2023, 10:49:49 AM
In which debate and dissent within one political party is somehow maligned while the other party continues to act as the statist authoritarian borg that they are.

And which one is worthy of criticism?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 04, 2023, 10:56:49 AM
In which debate and dissent within one political party is somehow maligned while the other party continues to act as the statist authoritarian borg that they are.

And which one is worthy of criticism?

If your point is "we mock the GOP for it's internal struggles but the Dems going without criticism" then you're screaming into an echo chamber.

Those paying attention believe both parties are pathetic and have long abandoned working for the people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 04, 2023, 11:01:22 AM

And which one is worthy of criticism?

Kevin McCarthy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 04, 2023, 11:01:40 AM
If your point is "we mock the GOP for it's internal struggles but the Dems going without criticism" then you're screaming into an echo chamber.

This place is largely an echo chamber when it comes to politics, yes.

Those paying attention believe both parties are pathetic and have long abandoned working for the people.

Also true, except one is more dangerous then the other re: collusions with big pharma, big tech, major corporate interests and having a literal praetorian guard when it comes to about 90 percent of the media in this country. Unfortunately I'm not exactly going to run to third party disasters like the DSA.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 04, 2023, 11:03:44 AM
This place is largely an echo chamber when it comes to politics, yes.

Also true, except one is more dangerous then the other re: collusions with big pharma, big tech, major corporate interests and having a literal praetorian guard when it comes to about 90 percent of the media in this country. Unfortunately I'm not exactly going to run to third party disasters like the DSA.

How is selling your loyalty to the highest bidder more dangerous than an insurrection? That's a bad faith argument.

Both are abysmal and disgusting but one is undoubtedly more dangerous than the other.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 04, 2023, 11:15:29 AM
How is selling your loyalty to the highest bidder more dangerous than an insurrection? That's a bad faith argument.

Both are abysmal and disgusting but one is undoubtedly more dangerous than the other.

Good thing we didn't have an insurrection. Asserting that January 6th was an insurrection despite our own intelligence agencies (and just to clarify, freak them too, they should be distrusted at every turn) refuses to classify it as such.

And yes, the one with institutional control over everything is infinitely more dangerous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 04, 2023, 11:18:09 AM
Good thing we didn't have an insurrection. Asserting that January 6th was an insurrection despite our own intelligence agencies (and just to clarify, freak them too, they should be distrusted at every turn) refuses to classify it as such.

And yes, the one with institutional control over everything is infinitely more dangerous.

freak them!

Unless they support my bullshit argument.

OK, let's get semantics out of the way.

The one that, in the least didn't have a problem with, but more accurately helped orchestrate, the January 6th mob attack on the capital in an effort to undermine democracy, is the one that is more dangerous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 04, 2023, 11:19:40 AM
freak them!

Unless they support my bullshit argument.

OK, let's get semantics out of the way.

The one that, in the least didn't have a problem with, but more accurately helped orchestrate, the January 6th mob attack on the capital in an effort to undermine democracy, is the one that is more dangerous.

Put Jan 6th aside.

The one that either wishes to ban abortions, burn books and otherwise install christo-fascist authoritarianism, or is willing to allow others to if it's expedient to their personal goals, is the one that is more dangerous.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 04, 2023, 11:20:38 AM
Good thing we didn't have an insurrection. Asserting that January 6th was an insurrection despite our own intelligence agencies (and just to clarify, freak them too, they should be distrusted at every turn) refuses to classify it as such.

And yes, the one with institutional control over everything is infinitely more dangerous.
What's the definition of insurrection again?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 04, 2023, 11:21:28 AM
What's the definition of insurrection again?

The definition depends on whether it makes my team look bad.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 04, 2023, 11:23:19 AM
The definition depends on whether it makes my team look bad.

I'm naming my fantasy football team "Insurrection Erection" next season
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 04, 2023, 11:27:22 AM
The definition depends on whether it makes my team look bad.

I didn't excrement my pants, I released some fecal material and my pants got in the way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 04, 2023, 11:27:39 AM
I'm naming my fantasy football team "Insurrection Erection" next season

Damn that's good! If your team loses, you can claim it was never an insurrection.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 04, 2023, 11:28:37 AM
I didn't excrement my pants, I released some fecal material and my pants got in the way.

Even the toilet paper intelligence committee agreed, it wasn't technically excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 04, 2023, 11:30:23 AM
Even the toilet paper intelligence committee agreed, it wasn't technically excrement.

Ha.  It was just post-digested food.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 04, 2023, 11:39:44 AM
freak them!

Unless they support my bullshit argument.

OK, let's get semantics out of the way.

The one that, in the least didn't have a problem with, but more accurately helped orchestrate, the January 6th mob attack on the capital in an effort to undermine democracy, is the one that is more dangerous.

We literally had the Senate building rushed by angry activists to prevent a confirmation of a supreme court justice on the basis of the flimsiest of accusations. What's the difference?

It's not a bullshit argument LMAO, our intelligence agencies literally have incentive to declare it an insurrection and couldn't do it.

Undermining democracy is utterly meaningless when the people launching that accusation have no issue with a house minority leader who literally denied the results of a freely held election.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 04, 2023, 11:50:23 AM

We literally had the Senate building rushed by angry activists to prevent a confirmation of a supreme court justice on the basis of the flimsiest of accusations. What's the difference?


This is "whataboutism" and only works to deflect the argument.


It's not a bullshit argument LMAO, our intelligence agencies literally have incentive to declare it an insurrection and couldn't do it.


Again, this is semantics, if you don't like the technical definition as "insurrection" that's fine. The violent protest that was organized, fueled, and supported by the far right. That's a lot of words but at least I didn't say "insurrection."

Undermining democracy is utterly meaningless when the people launching that accusation have no issue with a house minority leader who literally denied the results of a freely held election.


We're back to whataboutism. They did a bad thing so our bad thing isn't nearly as bad!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 04, 2023, 12:06:45 PM
Still laughing at the idea that Dems are uniquely the party of doing the bidding of the rich and powerful.  They're awful but Republicans are 100% that while Dems are maybe 80%.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 04, 2023, 01:38:16 PM
In which debate and dissent within one political party is somehow maligned while the other party continues to act as the statist authoritarian
borg
that they are.  And which one is worthy of criticism?
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/18/Björn_Borg_in_aktie%2C_Bestanddeelnr_930-2092.jpg/320px-Björn_Borg_in_aktie%2C_Bestanddeelnr_930-2092.jpg)
Absurd?  of course...speaking of double-standard projecting and deflecting....  :-l

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a6/Republican%3F_Democrat%3F_Undecided%3F_%288062316622%29.jpg/320px-Republican%3F_Democrat%3F_Undecided%3F_%288062316622%29.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 04, 2023, 02:10:54 PM
Watching Kevin McCarthy sell his soul, pride, ethics, and pretty much anything that isn't nailed down to become Speaker of the House....to have it in his grasp, only to have it snatched away because he's having to lie in the bed he made and "can't be trusted" by a bunch of kids he allowed to run the playground.....it's pretty hilarious.

This is the correct take.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 04, 2023, 02:20:42 PM

We literally had the Senate building rushed by angry activists to prevent a confirmation of a supreme court justice on the basis of the flimsiest of accusations. What's the difference?


This is "whataboutism" and only works to deflect the argument.


It's not a bullshit argument LMAO, our intelligence agencies literally have incentive to declare it an insurrection and couldn't do it.


Again, this is semantics, if you don't like the technical definition as "insurrection" that's fine. The violent protest that was organized, fueled, and supported by the far right. That's a lot of words but at least I didn't say "insurrection."

Undermining democracy is utterly meaningless when the people launching that accusation have no issue with a house minority leader who literally denied the results of a freely held election.


We're back to whataboutism. They did a bad thing so our bad thing isn't nearly as bad!

I usually find accusations of "whataboutism" are a shield to protect from blatant unadulterated hypocrisy, and I wasn't proven wrong.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 04, 2023, 02:22:12 PM
I usually find accusations of "whataboutism" are a shield to protect from blatant unadulterated hypocrisy, and I wasn't proven wrong.

That's a lot of words for "no u."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 04, 2023, 03:00:43 PM
That's a lot of words for "no u."

It's not no u, it's pointing out the ridiculous deflection when someone complains about people alleging behavior that they otherwise have no issue with when someone with a (D) next to their name perpetuates the same excrement.

Hakeem Jeffries openly denied the results of the 2016 election, according to the standards of the day that the left and their cohorts want to impose, that should disqualify him from any sort of higher position. Ohhhh but it's ok when we (D)o it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 04, 2023, 03:06:04 PM
It's not no u, it's pointing out the ridiculous deflection when someone complains about people alleging behavior that they otherwise have no issue with when someone with a (D) next to their name perpetuates the same excrement.

Hakeem Jeffries openly denied the results of the 2016 election, according to the standards of the day that the left and their cohorts want to impose, that should disqualify him from any sort of higher position. Ohhhh but it's ok when we (D)o it.

It's cute that you think I would give the D pass when I'm not a Democrat and do not identify as such. I do not give Hakeem Jeffries a pass nor any other shitty D.

However, this entire conversation was around a very specific incident that was legitimately dangerous from a violent and democratic perspective.

In other words, this is a prime example of "whataboutism" because we weren't talking about this. You specifically brought it up to deflect from the conversation we were engaging in.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 04, 2023, 04:27:00 PM
McCarthy said WHAT?!

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230104/007079b8d9621353b823cc9842b82d42.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 04, 2023, 05:22:25 PM
McCarthy said WHAT?!

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230104/007079b8d9621353b823cc9842b82d42.jpg)
No one can resist the elder melons.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 04, 2023, 09:06:06 PM
No one can resist the elder melons.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/23/Nancy_Pelosi_56673120.jpg/240px-Nancy_Pelosi_56673120.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2c/Cucumis_myriocarpus_-_Melons.JPG/320px-Cucumis_myriocarpus_-_Melons.JPG)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ac/Stockings5.jpg/281px-Stockings5.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 05, 2023, 07:32:36 AM
I'm guessing McCarthy will eventually dig up enough excrement to give away to become Speaker, even if it's for a short, embarrassing run.  He just wants to be Speaker at all cost, even if it's for 5 minutes and awful.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 05, 2023, 09:31:38 AM
https://twitter.com/RepChuyGarcia/status/1610741023709200398?s=20&t=Lm_R-4EGBy3Xye8ovYyv3g
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 05, 2023, 10:12:39 AM
https://twitter.com/RepChuyGarcia/status/1610741023709200398?s=20&t=Lm_R-4EGBy3Xye8ovYyv3g
haha,  a not-so-cryptic clever crack from cheatin' crypto crook Chuy   : )
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 05, 2023, 12:29:08 PM
Matt "hide your daughter" Gaetz voted for Donald Fuckin Trump. This isn't about governing this is about becoming a celebrity. freak the GOP and freak Gaetz.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 05, 2023, 01:35:55 PM
Matt "hide your daughter" Gaetz voted for Donald Fuckin Trump. This isn't about governing this is about becoming a celebrity. freak the GOP and freak Gaetz.

Something something AOC Met Gala something Omar Among Us tournament.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 05, 2023, 01:59:23 PM
https://twitter.com/esqueer_/status/1611082005050974229?s=46&t=0cuI-YhgdBDgrCqZp7tq5w

lololol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 05, 2023, 02:09:57 PM
Something something AOC Met Gala something Omar Among Us tournament.

Dammit! I believe I've been owned.

This entire excrement show has been so embarrassing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 05, 2023, 02:24:15 PM
https://twitter.com/esqueer_/status/1611082005050974229?s=46&t=0cuI-YhgdBDgrCqZp7tq5w

lololol

This is such a excrement show.

Sucks for the staffers because they don't get paid unless their members get sworn in.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 05, 2023, 02:27:11 PM
This is such a excrement show.

Sucks for the staffers because they don't get paid unless their members get sworn in.

That's fuckin criminal.

The right created a perfect situation for the inmates to run the asylum. Inmates take control and turn on them.

The right:
(https://external-content.duckduckgo.com/iu/?u=https%3A%2F%2Fc.tenor.com%2F_shmV1hUlZMAAAAd%2Fsurprised-pikachu.gif&f=1&nofb=1&ipt=731ea56881544e90515aff53fcb0edb7da63f0934f9ca9ab337f573a1f55a126&ipo=images)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 05, 2023, 02:34:13 PM
That's fuckin criminal.


So I rechecked, and that only applies to committee staffers, not the members' staff. Still sucks for those ones, though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 05, 2023, 02:35:47 PM
So I rechecked, and that only applies to committee staffers, not the members' staff. Still sucks for those ones, though.

Ahh, appreciate the clarification. No one should be working without pay, of course.

Again, how do they clowns not have a sense of shame?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2023, 04:13:43 PM
John Bolton 2024 (https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/john-bolton-presidential-bid-trump-b2257585.html)

Sounds like he's still mad at Trump for not letting him go play overseas with all the multi billion dollar war toys.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2023, 08:24:55 PM
Breaking:

(https://i.imgur.com/mKW9LDS.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 06, 2023, 09:36:24 PM
In which this place has become such a circle jerk/echo chamber for the left that we're now posting tweets from that freaking serial liar (who was embarrassed by Nancy Mace) Alejandra Caraballo.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 06, 2023, 11:57:29 PM
In which this place has become such a circle jerk/echo chamber for the left that we're now posting tweets from that freaking serial liar (who was embarrassed by Nancy Mace) Alejandra Caraballo.

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA.


On cue, you are too easy.


………it’s literally a video clip.

A serial lie!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 07, 2023, 12:00:26 AM
Now that MJ’s shields are down, all I have to do is post a link to an Aaron Rupar tweet that contains an unadulterated, 100% factual quote from an individual on the right that makes them look like a jackass and he will spontaneously combust
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 07, 2023, 01:11:08 AM

On cue, you are too easy.


………it’s literally a video clip.

A serial lie!!

The source material is from a complete hacktivist/professional victim who would be absolutely throwing her hands up with a "yasssss slay queeeeeen" if Boebert didn't have an (R) next to her name.

These are the same people that applauded the absolute ridiculousness of that freaking geriatric lush ripping up a page to signify her disgust with the sitting Presidents speech. Spare me.

I've still yet to understand why internal debate and dissent in order for a political party to best represent its constituency is a bad thing.

And just like that, the drama is over.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2023, 12:04:10 PM
First promise: repeal funding for 87k IRS hires that was intended to replace the 50% of Current IRS employees set to retire over the next 5 years.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 07, 2023, 01:03:09 PM
In which this place has become such a circle jerk/echo chamber for the left that we're now posting tweets from that freaking serial liar (who was embarrassed by Nancy Mace) Alejandra Caraballo.
* ooh...and donning a dong to boot....relax mj, your 'starboard' side of the political aisle notwithstanding....if



Now that MJ’s shields are down, all I have to do is post a link to an Aaron Rupar tweet that contains an unadulterated, 100% factual quote from an individual on the right that makes them look like a jackass and he will spontaneously combust
SFD, with all due respect is this thread's exchanges simply about "hey fellow southpaws, I've set the emotional reactionary zygote up for an Aaron Rupar KO shot?" 


mj,
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1611754003930439682?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

edit: ^^^ damn, Aaron Ruper (whatever you think about him, imho hit it on the screws...too bad it's been erased...for whatever the reason)

edit 2.0: Rupar's tweet essentially said to the effect (re: to KMcCarth's slop job coronation) "however embarrassing...this...how democracy works.."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 07, 2023, 02:58:40 PM
* Breaking: Mike Rogers (R) held back after lunging at Matt Gaetz (R) *

God Bless Mike Rogers


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 07, 2023, 10:12:15 PM
First promise: repeal funding for 87k IRS hires that was intended to replace the 50% of Current IRS employees set to retire over the next 5 years.
The IRS fixation from the temporarily-embarrassed millionaires on the right is so sad. Chumps.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 07, 2023, 11:18:17 PM
The IRS fixation from the temporarily-embarrassed millionaires on the right is so sad. Chumps.

It's the same playbook from the last time they controlled the House. Everytime the GOP.gets power they go after the tax workers.

And in this case the targets are the support staff.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 10, 2023, 08:45:29 AM
I'm increasingly convinced that the Republican game plan is being scripted by a room full of comedy writers.

https://www.businessinsider.com/house-gop-votes-gut-office-congressional-ethics-george-santos-fantastic-2023-1
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 10, 2023, 10:14:47 AM
The IRS fixation from the temporarily-embarrassed millionaires on the right is so sad. Chumps.

It's the same playbook from the last time they controlled the House. Everytime the GOP.gets power they go after the tax workers.

And in this case the targets are the support staff.
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/26/Lois_Lerner_testifying_before_US_House_Oversight_Cmte_in_2014.jpg/196px-Lois_Lerner_testifying_before_US_House_Oversight_Cmte_in_2014.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 10, 2023, 01:31:59 PM
Remember, it's not corruption because it's legal

https://twitter.com/Olivia_Beavers/status/1612887553098813440?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 10, 2023, 02:35:23 PM
The IRS fixation from the temporarily-embarrassed millionaires on the right is so sad. Chumps.

"temporarily-embarrassed millionaires" is so accurate, it's painful. I use this one all the time.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 10, 2023, 03:50:56 PM
Rich people gutting the IRS so they can get away with not paying taxes, while convincing the rubes that this benefits them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 10, 2023, 04:09:18 PM
Rich people gutting the IRS so they can get away with not paying taxes, while convincing the rubes that this benefits them.

Didn't we all read Animal Farm in high school?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 10, 2023, 04:11:21 PM
FROM MY COLD, DEAD, OVEN MITTS

https://twitter.com/RonnyJacksonTX/status/1612839703018934274?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 10, 2023, 04:16:05 PM
FROM MY COLD, DEAD, OVEN MITTS

https://twitter.com/RonnyJacksonTX/status/1612839703018934274?s=19

lmao - we are doomed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 10, 2023, 04:56:49 PM
FROM MY COLD, DEAD, OVEN MITTS

https://twitter.com/RonnyJacksonTX/status/1612839703018934274?s=19

In fairness, the idea of banning gas stoves is objectively stupid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 10, 2023, 05:49:30 PM
https://twitter.com/TrivWorks/status/1612563861668007936
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 10, 2023, 05:53:04 PM
https://twitter.com/TrivWorks/status/1612563861668007936

A deranged ex Crossfit instructor and a pathological liar. They're not sending their best, are they?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 10, 2023, 05:59:53 PM
https://trac.syr.edu/reports/706/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 11, 2023, 07:40:18 AM
https://trac.syr.edu/reports/706/
And do you think the IRS independently decided to do this because they're eeeeevil or because the wealthy have too much control over the government?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 11, 2023, 07:41:43 AM
And do you think the IRS independently decided to do this because they're eeeeevil or because the wealthy have too much control over the government?

yes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 11, 2023, 11:11:15 AM
In fairness, the idea of banning gas stoves is objectively stupid.

They're not trying to ban gas stoves, they're offering incentives to replace them with electric ranges.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 11, 2023, 11:12:59 AM
They're not trying to ban gas stoves, they're offering incentives to replace them with electric ranges.

WH: We’ll give you tax breaks and vouchers to change.

Lunatics: They’re trying to take away my freedom.

Note: I decided against multiple condos when I was searching specifically so I could get a gas range.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 11, 2023, 11:33:28 AM
They're not trying to ban gas stoves, they're offering incentives to replace them with electric ranges.

Then this guy needs to be a bit smarter with his language.

Quote
“This is a hidden hazard,” Mr. Trumka said an interview with Bloomberg on Monday. “Any option is on the table. Products that can’t be made safe can be banned.”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/11/climate/gas-stoves-biden-administration.html

My point stands - the idea is stupid and someone in his position raising it as a possibility is also stupid.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 11, 2023, 11:39:12 AM
Then this guy needs to be a bit smarter with his language.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/01/11/climate/gas-stoves-biden-administration.html

My point stands - the idea is stupid and someone in his position raising it as a possibility is also stupid.

Yeah, every heat source in a house is a potential hazard. That's really not a great argument.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 11, 2023, 11:52:47 AM
I guess the issue is the lack of venting.  To my knowledge, I believe other natural gas products have included venting of the fumes.  I know my furnace and gas logs vent it out automatically.  With a stove, you have to actively turn on the vent above.

I don't know enough about the research yet.

I will say cooking with gas is soooo much better.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 11, 2023, 12:19:39 PM
I guess the issue is the lack of venting.  To my knowledge, I believe other natural gas products have included venting of the fumes.  I know my furnace and gas logs vent it out automatically.  With a stove, you have to actively turn on the vent above.

I don't know enough about the research yet.

I will say cooking with gas is soooo much better.


It has been code since forever to install a hood vent over a gas stove. "But people might not use it so we should consider restricting use of gas stoves" is no different to "people might not use seatbelts so we should consider not letting them drive cars".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 11, 2023, 12:30:02 PM
And do you think the IRS independently decided to do this because they're eeeeevil or because the wealthy have too much control over the government?
Lois…what about Lois?  Looking at whom she and her IRS operatives specifically targeted was not based on ‘wealth’ but more their political POV and moreover that she had to resort to pleading the 5th like some underworld thug (this the head of a government agency mind you) is beyond the pale and by any objective standard should give pause….pretty chilling…
Quote from: MBGreen
yes
a r b y ‘ s    go eat


In other news: hey George ’the embelisher’ Santos you lying sack of shlt, it’s pretty freaking sad when your own party—and in your own backyard no less—refuses to recognize you (calling you “a fraud”) and instead is calling for your immediate resignation.  Maybe read the tea leaves Pinocchio….

https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/01/11/politics/george-santos-nassau-county-resign/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 11, 2023, 02:22:12 PM
It has been code since forever to install a hood vent over a gas stove. "But people might not use it so we should consider restricting use of gas stoves" is no different to "people might not use seatbelts so we should consider not letting them drive cars".
I don't know that it's common knowledge to turn on the vent fan every time you light the burner, like it is that you should buckle your seatbelt.  Do you turn it on when you boil water?  I don't, but I guess I should.  I never thought about it until now. 

It might indeed be overblown, but I think it's worth looking into.  I'm not saying it should be banned though.

Also what is the alternative to driving a car that's reasonable for most people? Can't catch a bus or a train in the sticks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 11, 2023, 09:08:12 PM
The Crossfit philanderer got a slapping from Dre.

https://dam.tmz.com/document/c4/o/2023/01/09/c47058ead12a432d938227fb78d6d3a0.pdf
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 12, 2023, 10:44:41 AM
https://twitter.com/badlipreading/status/1613353470886834177?s=46&t=mzm50bCjal39TS6UBoApLQ
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 12, 2023, 11:49:59 AM
"George Santos should’ve called himself a progressive so that the NY dem party would’ve done oppo research against him."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 12, 2023, 03:26:59 PM
It has been code since forever to install a hood vent over a gas stove. "But people might not use it so we should consider restricting use of gas stoves" is no different to "people might not use seatbelts so we should consider not letting them drive cars".
Glad to see the amount of effort going into the discourse about the new version of "AOC wants to take away ur cheeseburders".
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 12, 2023, 05:22:53 PM
https://twitter.com/DougJBalloon/status/1613620720075956226?s=20&t=jg3knJp1G6vgHxEPXWkPpQ (https://twitter.com/DougJBalloon/status/1613620720075956226?s=20&t=jg3knJp1G6vgHxEPXWkPpQ)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 12, 2023, 06:20:58 PM
https://twitter.com/DougJBalloon/status/1613620720075956226?s=20&t=jg3knJp1G6vgHxEPXWkPpQ (https://twitter.com/DougJBalloon/status/1613620720075956226?s=20&t=jg3knJp1G6vgHxEPXWkPpQ)
https://twitter.com/drmistercody/status/1613635701752623104?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 13, 2023, 11:11:31 AM
The Republicans were right, election fraud is real (https://www.businessinsider.com/wife-of-iowa-republican-accused-of-casting-23-fraudulent-votes-2023-1)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 13, 2023, 01:34:16 PM
I'm not a Trump guy, but "Car-a-lago" is a little funny with the whole Biden garage thing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 13, 2023, 02:17:09 PM
I'm not a Trump guy, but "Car-a-lago" is a little funny with the whole Biden garage thing.

Occasionally they strike gold on the puns.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 13, 2023, 03:16:23 PM
The Republicans were right, election fraud is real (https://www.businessinsider.com/wife-of-iowa-republican-accused-of-casting-23-fraudulent-votes-2023-1)

Hur's vetting joe

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/9a/Zappa_Joe%27s_Garage.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 13, 2023, 03:29:31 PM
The Republicans were right, election fraud is real (https://www.businessinsider.com/wife-of-iowa-republican-accused-of-casting-23-fraudulent-votes-2023-1)

No, this isn't what we meant...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 14, 2023, 08:36:33 AM
WSJ: George Santos Raised Money for Company the SEC Says Was a Ponzi Scheme

https://www.wsj.com/articles/george-santos-raised-money-for-company-the-sec-says-was-a-ponzi-scheme-11673669864

Now watch him ironically trying to sell this as some made up falsehood
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 15, 2023, 09:45:47 AM
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/14/more-documents-found-at-bidens-delaware-home-00077982

How the freak does this excrement happen again and again with every president

Biden, Trump, Hillary, and I'm sure every president before then.

The US spends more money on military and security than every nation in existence yet it seems like we regularly have classified documents just sitting in piles on people's garage floors.

I'm not expecting a perfect process, but surely the level of competence should be somewhere above completely incompetent
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 15, 2023, 09:47:07 AM
My unassailable position is that this country hasn't had a secret that deserved keeping since after WW2.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 15, 2023, 10:20:01 AM
Communism is when capitalism

https://twitter.com/KariLakeWarRoom/status/1614074700199792640?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 17, 2023, 05:19:37 PM
Dope should've just taken the L

https://www.voanews.com/a/ex-gop-candidate-charged-in-shootings-at-lawmakers-homes-/6922234.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 17, 2023, 05:49:51 PM
George Santos is like a matryoshka doll of sociopathy

https://patch.com/new-york/westislip/s/ijr6t/disabled-veteran-george-santos-took-3k-dying-dogs-gofundme
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 17, 2023, 06:07:41 PM
George Santos killed a US Marine's service dog is not a depth I expected even him to go.

On the other hand he's willing to vote for anything the Republicans tell him to, so what are they supposed to do?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 18, 2023, 04:37:16 PM
Our nation’s capital looking to lessen the penalty for a violent crime (carjacking).  Makes perfect sense.

https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/washington-dc/dc-averaging-1-carjacking-a-day-council-expected-to-lessen-penalties-with-criminal-code-veto-override/amp/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 18, 2023, 05:23:27 PM
George Santos is like a matryoshka doll of sociopathy

https://patch.com/new-york/westislip/s/ijr6t/disabled-veteran-george-santos-took-3k-dying-dogs-gofundme

https://twitter.com/marisakabas/status/1615808517176234020?s=42&t=LCXRTpcjenkIaDOHLbCeFw
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 18, 2023, 08:09:21 PM
https://twitter.com/patriottakes/status/1615850043323420672?s=46&t=mTuyudR2M51t82BlAGXCcg

Trinity the Tuck lmfao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 18, 2023, 08:17:19 PM
Communism is when capitalism

https://twitter.com/KariLakeWarRoom/status/1614074700199792640?s=19
Isn't it:

'with capitalism the rich get powerful and with communism the powerful get rich' ?    ; )
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 18, 2023, 08:21:04 PM
Isn't it:

'with capitalism the rich get powerful and with communism the powerful get rich' ?    ; )

But with absolutely nothing in between the two, whatcha gonna do?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 19, 2023, 12:40:22 PM
George Santos killed a US Marine's service dog is not a depth I expected even him to go.

On the other hand he's willing to vote for anything the Republicans tell him to, so what are they supposed to do?
GOP will be more upset that he was a drag queen than any of the million lies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 19, 2023, 12:44:44 PM
GOP will be more upset that he was a drag queen than any of the million lies.


Of course, just like it was a hint of gayness that actually took down Cawthorn rather than any of the actual despicable things about him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 19, 2023, 02:09:22 PM
Fwiw Rep. Jim Kolbe an openly gay GOP house member addressed the Republican National Convention in Philly back in 2006. 

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/story?id=96296&page=1









Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 19, 2023, 02:33:04 PM
Fwiw Rep. Jim Kolbe an openly gay GOP house member addressed the Republican National Convention in Philly back in 2006. 

https://abcnews.go.com/amp/US/story?id=96296&page=1

I feel like the rabid social conservative voice wasn't as strong in the GOP in 2006 as it is today, but I'm willing to be corrected on this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 23, 2023, 12:16:07 PM
I feel like the rabid social conservative voice wasn't as strong in the GOP in 2006 as it is today, but I'm willing to be corrected on this.

No ‘correction’ per se JE, just a fwiw fyi.  Heaven knows prejudice abounds whatever the target or the source.
_______________________

in other news…

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/3826508-schiff-swalwell-submitted-to-intel-panel-forcing-fight-with-mccarthy/amp/

Shifty and Shiftier  …….chuckle

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bc/Snake_eyes_with_Chinese_dice.jpg/320px-Snake_eyes_with_Chinese_dice.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 23, 2023, 01:37:02 PM
Ok, bring it then Pinnochio

https://twitter.com/Santos4Congress/status/1617326403149594626
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 24, 2023, 06:17:39 AM
Ron Deathsantis at it again

https://twitter.com/JessPish/status/1617650543052353537?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 24, 2023, 12:01:15 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/24/pence-classified-documents-home/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/24/pence-classified-documents-home/)

Time to check  Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Cheney.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 24, 2023, 12:20:32 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/24/pence-classified-documents-home/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/24/pence-classified-documents-home/)

Time to check  Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Cheney.
I think I may have a few.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 24, 2023, 12:22:40 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/24/pence-classified-documents-home/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/01/24/pence-classified-documents-home/)

Time to check  Clinton, Bush, Obama, and Cheney.

Can only imagine what ‘Halliburton/Iraq’ docs that surreptitious snake’s squirreled away. 

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 24, 2023, 12:52:07 PM
So none of this matters, right? Like, zero repercussions for any of these people.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 24, 2023, 01:13:56 PM
So none of this matters, right? Like, zero repercussions for any of these people.
They're gonna stack all the pages found on each side and whichever team has less wins the 2024 election.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 24, 2023, 01:59:53 PM
So none of this matters, right? Like, zero repercussions for any of these people.
Correct.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 24, 2023, 02:13:57 PM
They're gonna stack all the pages found on each side and whichever team has less wins the 2024 election.

SBT our current political system.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 24, 2023, 04:40:15 PM
(https://i.redd.it/be7ryg1011ea1.png)

My guy is keeping an eye out for those assassins tho
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 24, 2023, 06:46:18 PM
For the love of god please go back to the egg price hysteria

https://twitter.com/JudiciaryGOP/status/1617581599293599744?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 24, 2023, 06:53:16 PM
For the love of god please go back to the egg price hysteria

https://twitter.com/JudiciaryGOP/status/1617581599293599744?s=19

Seems lke something the judiciary committee should be concerned with.

Being the green one's heels back so Tucker Carlson can sexualize her more.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 25, 2023, 08:36:59 AM
Seems lke something the judiciary committee should be concerned with.

Being the green one's heels back so Tucker Carlson can sexualize her more.

https://twitter.com/beeple/status/1618110454894821376?s=20&t=7wKqqN5njGLApVFurKwwlQ
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 25, 2023, 08:57:57 AM
https://twitter.com/beeple/status/1618110454894821376?s=20&t=7wKqqN5njGLApVFurKwwlQ
^  hahaha

what in the world ever happened to
”melts in your mouth, not in your hand” ?

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/NYC_M%26M%27S_Store_Picture_for_the_side.jpg/320px-NYC_M%26M%27S_Store_Picture_for_the_side.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 25, 2023, 10:18:35 AM
^  hahaha

what in the world ever happened to
”melts in your mouth, not in your hand” ?

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/7b/NYC_M%26M%27S_Store_Picture_for_the_side.jpg/320px-NYC_M%26M%27S_Store_Picture_for_the_side.jpg)
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/zdv5gv/how_would_you_get_a_small_cylinder_51in_length
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 25, 2023, 11:22:53 AM
https://www.reddit.com/r/AskReddit/comments/zdv5gv/how_would_you_get_a_small_cylinder_51in_length
lol amazing - how/where’d you dig that up?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 25, 2023, 11:59:53 AM
lol amazing - how/where’d you dig that up?
Saw it the first time around when it was posted and the above posts reminded me of it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 25, 2023, 01:27:42 PM
https://twitter.com/ronfilipkowski/status/1617921670450380803?s=46&t=V8EluXRicuEn0im9yNNmEw

Xbox is woke now smh
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 25, 2023, 01:31:30 PM
https://twitter.com/ronfilipkowski/status/1617921670450380803?s=46&t=V8EluXRicuEn0im9yNNmEw

Xbox is woke now smh

Meanwhile, Kotaku has been going after Microsoft and Xbox for the last couple of weeks because Phil Spenser had the audacity to reference and call out cancel culture.

Can't please anybody apparently.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 25, 2023, 08:59:55 PM
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/01/marjorie-taylor-greene-lauren-boebert-bathroom-fight/amp

(https://i.ibb.co/PrP5v4t/9096-B5-A2-0439-4290-B1-A6-E926-E3507-A76.jpg) (https://imgbb.com/)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 26, 2023, 11:02:10 AM
Quote
- In 2020, George Santos (R) captured 161,931 votes in #NY03 and lost by 12.5 pts.
- In 2022, George Santos (R) captured 145,824 votes in #NY03 and won by 7.5 pts.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 26, 2023, 11:13:05 AM
Election year vs midterm. Those numbers make some degree of sense, clearly a lot of unmotivated Democrats.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 26, 2023, 11:17:17 AM
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/01/marjorie-taylor-greene-lauren-boebert-bathroom-fight/amp

As much a turn off as MTG and Boebert types are this story read like a high school bathroom dustup and hardly the “brawl” the hyper partisan VF would suggest.  If the heresay-heavy story’s crudely worded title weren’t enough the very first paragraph pretty much summed it up:

“We submit there is not, short of Kevin McCarthy and Co. being chauffeured to the Capitol in a literal clown car.”  lol

A testy off-the-field exchange doesn’t exactly translate into “they, the other side are in free fall and coming apart at the seams!”  Again, no fan of those 2 clowns, more about the *journalism* fwiw…

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 26, 2023, 11:30:04 AM
https://twitter.com/angry_staffer/status/1618597677511606272?s=46&t=OaUvOLQL_h-RY3oc2vj-Qg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 26, 2023, 11:38:20 AM
Is this the rumour about him having an affair with his male press secretary? I thought that had been debunked as the figment of one of those online ghouls' imagination?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 26, 2023, 11:44:37 AM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1618619926767632386?s=46&t=FJKIbW7RCReXY43GMZ_-8Q

Marge amplifying this story is hilarious

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 26, 2023, 11:49:31 AM
Jewish space lasers woman complaining about truth and accuracy is a bold move. Still, I imagine she's a bit sensitive about media reporting on "family values" politicians having affairs for obvious reasons.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 26, 2023, 11:51:19 AM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1618619926767632386?s=46&t=FJKIbW7RCReXY43GMZ_-8Q

Marge amplifying this story is hilarious



(https://media.tenor.com/AnHgUy5P2zcAAAAd/marjorie-taylor-greene-pull-up.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 26, 2023, 11:56:32 AM
(https://media.tenor.com/AnHgUy5P2zcAAAAd/marjorie-taylor-greene-pull-up.gif)

Zero. Zero. Zero. Zero.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 26, 2023, 11:59:16 AM
Zero. Zero. Zero. Zero.

LMAO

Somehow this is funnier coming from a military man.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 26, 2023, 12:03:00 PM
https://twitter.com/Sturgeons_Law/status/1618623815340417025?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on January 26, 2023, 12:42:08 PM
Zero. Zero. Zero. Zero.

Hahaha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 26, 2023, 12:54:11 PM
That dickhead Adam Schiff is running for Senate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 27, 2023, 12:09:40 PM
https://twitter.com/bigadshaban/status/1619019200949010432?s=46&t=EwMxKgZLuyMuocmzOZX4hQ

Paul Pelosi hammer attack video just dropped 🔥

Extremely sus
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 27, 2023, 03:06:59 PM
https://twitter.com/bigadshaban/status/1619019200949010432?s=46&t=EwMxKgZLuyMuocmzOZX4hQ

Paul Pelosi hammer attack video just dropped 🔥

Extremely sus

what is sus about it? Dude was being held hostage then had his head bashed with a fuckin hammer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 27, 2023, 04:48:00 PM
what is sus about it? Dude was being held hostage then had his head bashed with a fuckin hammer.

I thought the weird republican conspiracy theories about it being his secret gay lover etc etc were straight up retarded nonsense.

But is he holding a drink in his other hand? And he does look disoriented as hell. Plus I'd think the normal instinct for someone trying to attack you with a freaking hammer is to drop whatever the hell is in your other hand and defend yourself.

The Republican gay lover theories obviously are retarded, but there's definitely  some bizarre elements here
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 27, 2023, 05:24:49 PM
I thought the weird republican conspiracy theories about it being his secret gay lover etc etc were straight up retarded nonsense.

But is he holding a drink in his other hand? And he does look disoriented as hell. Plus I'd think the normal instinct for someone trying to attack you with a freaking hammer is to drop whatever the hell is in your other hand and defend yourself.

The Republican gay lover theories obviously are retarded, but there's definitely  some bizarre elements here
He's 800 years old, he isn't defending himself much physically.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 27, 2023, 05:26:10 PM
He's 800 years old, he isn't defending himself much physically.

I'm not suggesting that he would overpower the guy or win

But am I seeing things wrong, or is he holding a glass in his hand? That alone is freaking weird



Also I can't tell if they're handcuffed together or some bizarre excrement

(if you said this was some senile guy with dementia or something like that, then everything about this makes much more sense, though he was arrested for a DUI like 2 months before? So the most sense would be hearing that he was just a excrement faced alcoholic and probably was annoying the intruder unless he had his drink)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 27, 2023, 07:09:34 PM
I thought the weird republican conspiracy theories about it being his secret gay lover etc etc were straight up retarded nonsense.

But is he holding a drink in his other hand? And he does look disoriented as hell. Plus I'd think the normal instinct for someone trying to attack you with a freaking hammer is to drop whatever the hell is in your other hand and defend yourself.

The Republican gay lover theories obviously are retarded, but there's definitely  some bizarre elements here
Orrrrrr he’s trying to avoid escalating the situation when he’s outmatched physically and has 30 years on him.

Everyone claims they know how they’d act in a stressful situation but you don’t know excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on January 27, 2023, 07:25:31 PM
Orrrrrr he’s trying to avoid escalating the situation when he’s outmatched physically and has 30 years on him.

Everyone claims they know how they’d act in a stressful situation but you don’t know excrement.

By holding a drink in his hand? The guys 80 and all the stuff that relates to that is fair

He looks completely freaking out of it though, which again could be a variety of things (dementia, alcoholism, being old, being woken up in the middle of the night)

Quite frankly Nancy Pelosis husband isn't a person any of us should give a excrement a about. At the end of the day it looks weird doesn't have much significance outside of that.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on January 27, 2023, 07:36:38 PM
Get to the bottom of this mystery, dcm.  We're all counting on you. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 27, 2023, 08:31:36 PM


The Republican gay lover theories obviously are retarded, but there's definitely  some bizarre elements here

When you combine a senile drunk and some delusional chud you're going to get bizarre elements.

The entire gay thing is just an intentional distraction from the fact that a right winger broke into Pelosi's house to hammurder her.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 27, 2023, 08:37:43 PM

a right winger broke into Pelosi's house to hammurder her.

Lmao what.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 27, 2023, 08:38:40 PM
Lmao what.
My bad, he definitely had no discernible motivation. Actually he just wanted to talk.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 27, 2023, 08:43:48 PM
My bad, he definitely had no discernible motivation. Actually he just wanted to talk.

No, you're right. The guy who lived in the equivalent of a hippie commune and espoused all kinds of lefty political theory is a hardline right winger.

Cenk level take. Why can't crazy people just be crazy?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on January 28, 2023, 12:06:54 PM
No, you're right. The guy who lived in the equivalent of a hippie commune and espoused all kinds of lefty political theory is a hardline right winger.

Cenk level take. Why can't crazy people just be crazy?

Whether he's a right wing nut or a left wing nut, he's still a nut who tried to murder this dude. His motivation likely was political because Nancy Pelosi isn't a liberal or a conservative. She's just another politician trying to get as much power and money as possible.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 28, 2023, 12:10:09 PM
Whether he's a right wing nut or a left wing nut, he's still a nut who tried to murder this dude. His motivation likely was political because Nancy Pelosi isn't a liberal or a conservative. She's just another politician trying to get as much power and money as possible.

those titters can do what they want.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 28, 2023, 02:09:54 PM
those titters can do what they want.
He may have been mad because he didn't get to see her hangers.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 28, 2023, 02:20:06 PM
He may have been mad because he didn't get to see her hangers.
I would be
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 28, 2023, 02:58:15 PM
I would be
Went to see tittays, saw old balls.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on January 28, 2023, 05:27:02 PM
"...'cause tittteees.......are better than balls...."
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/ab/Hank_Williams_publicity.jpg/357px-Hank_Williams_publicity.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on January 28, 2023, 09:54:40 PM
No, you're right. The guy who lived in the equivalent of a hippie commune and espoused all kinds of lefty political theory is a hardline right winger.

Cenk level take. Why can't crazy people just be crazy?
CNN: Paul Pelosi attacker trafficks in conspiracy theories in call to TV station after video release.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/28/politics/david-depape-far-right-conspiracies/index.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 29, 2023, 09:23:41 AM
Whether he's a right wing nut or a left wing nut, he's still a nut who tried to murder this dude. His motivation likely was political because Nancy Pelosi isn't a liberal or a conservative. She's just another politician trying to get as much power and money as possible.


Reasonable take is reasonable.

CNN: Paul Pelosi attacker trafficks in conspiracy theories in call to TV station after video release.
https://www.cnn.com/2023/01/28/politics/david-depape-far-right-conspiracies/index.html

Read the actual article. What was a conspiracy theory? That Trump's campaign was illegally spied on? It was? That all politicians lie? They do.

CNN continues to be absolute excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 29, 2023, 09:43:28 AM
Hammers are how Italians naturally communicate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on January 29, 2023, 09:44:26 AM
wooden spoons and hand gestures are how Italians naturally communicate.

FYP
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Gorilla on January 29, 2023, 12:26:49 PM
FYP

Married to an Italian...can confirm.

Also...Mappine/mappina is a dish towel. That's the other thing i learned.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 29, 2023, 04:08:52 PM
Whether he's a right wing nut or a left wing nut, he's still a nut who tried to murder this dude. His motivation likely was political because Nancy Pelosi isn't a liberal or a conservative. She's just another politician trying to get as much power and money as possible.
She is a liberal. She's not a leftist. American politicians are 90% center or right.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 29, 2023, 06:31:16 PM
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/28/trump-2024-campaign-00080043 (https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/28/trump-2024-campaign-00080043)

This excrement will be funny until it's not.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 29, 2023, 06:45:52 PM
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/28/trump-2024-campaign-00080043 (https://www.politico.com/news/2023/01/28/trump-2024-campaign-00080043)

This excrement will be funny until it's not.

It's awesome. I really, really, really want to see Trump and DeSanctimonious (it doesn't even make sense which might be why it's funny) kicking the excrement out of each for the next few months. DeSantis has taken the high ground so far but there's only so long he can sit back and let Trump embed his negatives in people's minds, if he lets it go too long he won't be able to unstick them but if he does it too soon it looks like he's playing defense against legitimate claims.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 01, 2023, 11:38:24 AM
"We're not going to play the GOP's games"

*immediately plays their games*

https://twitter.com/NewDemCoalition/status/1620800224842362881?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 01, 2023, 01:03:32 PM
Yay.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 01, 2023, 02:41:16 PM
"We're not going to play the GOP's games"

*immediately plays their games*

https://twitter.com/NewDemCoalition/status/1620800224842362881?s=19

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/2/20/Logo_of_Socialist_Organizer%2C_U.S._Section_of_the_Fourth_International.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/2c/U.S._Chamber_of_Commerce_Building.jpg/320px-U.S._Chamber_of_Commerce_Building.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/7/72/Mcdonalds.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/2/25/Hand_in_hand.jpg/640px-Hand_in_hand.jpg)


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K6uEwpCdV3U



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 02, 2023, 10:08:27 AM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2023/02/02/gop-councilwoman-eunice-dwumfour-killed-nj/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 02, 2023, 03:51:29 PM
Today was easily the hottest that horsefaced retard has looked since unfortunately entering the public eye, even if the venom she spewed had no basis in reality.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 03, 2023, 01:05:10 AM
Today was easily the hottest that horsefaced retard has looked since unfortunately entering the public eye, even if the venom she spewed had no basis in reality.
Honest question: who you talkin' about, Lindsey Graham?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 03, 2023, 06:29:10 AM
Honest question: who you talkin' about, Lindsey Graham?

I'll forever think Pelosi and Graham look alike because of this
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 03, 2023, 07:08:42 AM
Honest question: who you talkin' about, Lindsey Graham?

The congresswoman with the face so masculine even Lindsey could jerk off too her, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 03, 2023, 09:43:20 AM
The congresswoman with the face so masculine even Lindsey could jerk off too her, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez.

(https://clerk.house.gov/content/assets/img/members/G000596.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 03, 2023, 09:46:20 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/WnzoOMn.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 03, 2023, 09:47:17 AM
#bigcringe
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 03, 2023, 10:36:48 AM
The congresswoman with the face so masculine even Lindsey could jerk off too her, Alexandria Ocasio Cortez.
More 'gums' than Wrigley's & Juicyfruit combined yes but I wouldn't call AOE's mug masculine; more a harder-edged, snarly Pheobe Cates.  And while I liked SFD's MTG entry (remove the long hair and that crusty hag looks like a TE on a number of NFC South teams), I really liked JE's more shall we say 'genteel' approach "you want 'masculine'?...here's masculine..."   *golf clap*

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2jNICI38fEc

statesmasculineship
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1tk01l_jRX0

(https://media.giphy.com/media/QGVtdUAxfasLNlyhUJ/giphy.gif)





Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 03, 2023, 08:03:44 PM
(https://clerk.house.gov/content/assets/img/members/G000596.jpg)

YoUr CoNGrEsSwOmAN iS uGlIeR.

The difference of course being the entire mass media campaign dedicated behind AOC (inclusive of that dumb shot where she's walking past those white boys who are clearly "checking her out").

Literally no one thinks MTG is hot. The better comparison would've been Boebert...who is actually a total smokeshow.

(https://i.imgur.com/WnzoOMn.png)

So homophobic! I didn't realize you and Proverov were besties.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 03, 2023, 09:06:33 PM
YoUr CoNGrEsSwOmAN iS uGlIeR.

The difference of course being the entire mass media campaign dedicated behind AOC (inclusive of that dumb shot where she's walking past those white boys who are clearly "checking her out").

Literally no one thinks MTG is hot. The better comparison would've been Boebert...who is actually a total smokeshow.

So homophobic! I didn't realize you and Proverov were besties.
I'm not the one so scared of being gay that he dismisses actual hot chicks because he's scared they look like men.

FWIW, I'd love to be gay. So many advantages, including the double size wardrobe and the absence of "you wouldn't understand". Only thing stopping me is that I don't fancy men.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 03, 2023, 10:02:07 PM
I'm not the one so scared of being gay that he dismisses actual hot chicks because he's scared they look like men.

FWIW, I'd love to be gay. So many advantages, including the double size wardrobe and the absence of "you wouldn't understand". Only thing stopping me is that I don't fancy men.

FreudEnglish with some psychoanalysis, but for example, as much as say Adam Schiff might be a blotched faced mess of a liar, if he was dressing in drag it wouldn't be any sort of fodder for criticism on my end. Santos has some other things going on (like Richard Blumenthal/Elizabeth Warren's penchant for inventing a backstory) that's plenty suitable for criticism.

Re: thinking AOC is gross having anything to do with being scared of the gay,  Kirsten Sinema has some harder features and I'd rail the excrement out of her.  It's not partisan either, as much as I despise our corrupt prosecutor of a vice president who laughed at locking people up on weed charges, she could absolutely get it. AOC just looks like a horse. Every time I see her I think of Milhouse's show and tell.

 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 03, 2023, 11:43:59 PM

FreudEnglish with some psychoanalysis, but for example, as much as say Adam Schiff might be a blotched faced mess of a liar, if he was dressing in drag it wouldn't be any sort of fodder for criticism on my end. Santos has some other things going on (like Richard Blumenthal/Elizabeth Warren's penchant for inventing a backstory) that's plenty suitable for criticism.

Except that if you're going to criticise a Dem for having overly masculine features, the opportunity to respond with an actual drag queen amongst your ranks is not one I'm passing up.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 04, 2023, 12:50:36 PM
Literally no one thinks MTG is hot. The better comparison

would've been Boebert...who is actually a total smokeshow.
Total?   Maybe with a total eclipse of the head

Lauren Boebert directions:
- place bag over head
- plow

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/e5/Brown_paper_bag_with_happy_smiley_over_head.jpg/280px-Brown_paper_bag_with_happy_smiley_over_head.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/cb/Lauren_Boebert.JPG/138px-Lauren_Boebert.JPG)

  edit:

- flip over
- plow


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on February 04, 2023, 02:51:13 PM
(https://i.redd.it/e2ri5ow8h7ga1.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 04, 2023, 03:18:55 PM
I'm not sure if they're that stupid, or they just think you are.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 04, 2023, 06:05:31 PM
Dems making sure nobody to the left of Clinton or Biden ever gets any momentum in a primary

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/2024-election/democrats-make-south-carolina-first-presidential-primary-voting-state-rcna68918
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 07, 2023, 08:31:16 PM
https://twitter.com/jasonrector/status/1623140879736406017?t=Dg496sbz2AE-1nlV15qktg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 07, 2023, 11:58:16 PM
https://twitter.com/jasonrector/status/1623140879736406017?t=Dg496sbz2AE-1nlV15qktg&s=19

https://twitter.com/ING2Firebrand/status/1623149865185300480
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 08, 2023, 05:36:21 AM
https://twitter.com/ING2Firebrand/status/1623149865185300480
Haha
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 09, 2023, 06:24:35 PM
These freaking people keep failing upward.

https://twitter.com/GarrettHaake/status/1623715168570974209?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 10, 2023, 10:00:18 AM
NYT piece on Fetterman

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/10/us/politics/john-fetterman-senate-stroke.amp.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 10, 2023, 10:19:50 AM
NYT piece on Fetterman

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/10/us/politics/john-fetterman-senate-stroke.amp.htmlN

Might want to delete that "N" at the end of the link.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 10, 2023, 01:59:12 PM
Coolest thing George Santos ever did

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/09/george-santos-was-charged-with-theft-in-dog-case.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 10, 2023, 02:52:19 PM
Coolest thing George Santos ever did

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/02/09/george-santos-was-charged-with-theft-in-dog-case.html
“Yeah that’s it!…that’s the ticket!”
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4e/Rep._George_Santos_Official_Portrait_%28cropped%29.jpg/192px-Rep._George_Santos_Official_Portrait_%28cropped%29.jpg)(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/99/JonLovitz08_%28cropped%29.jpg/162px-JonLovitz08_%28cropped%29.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 11, 2023, 05:06:38 PM
Today in People Claiming George Santos Lied to Them: Amish Farmers

https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2023/02/10/george-santos-amish-puppies/ (https://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/2023/02/10/george-santos-amish-puppies/)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 12, 2023, 08:50:21 AM
https://www.propublica.org/article/irs-files-taxes-wash-sales-goldman-sachs

This isn't a new thing, and I know it's very boring to read.  The wash sale rule has been long abused.  I can't blame the rich for using the existing laws to their benefit.  The issue is that the law hasn't been modified to adjust for people finding ways around it.

Even if the clouds aligned and the government decided to actually try to help make something better, I'm not sure how they could adjust this rule without someone still being able to sneak around it or making it so restrictive that people aren't getting taxed on legitimate losses.  Yes, I know they should just tax rich people at a higher rate, I'm not talking about that, I'm talking about fixing this particular rule.  It's quite clearly having your cake and eating it too.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 12, 2023, 06:34:58 PM
Having a normal one

https://twitter.com/LoriLightfoot/status/1624912421985951744?s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 14, 2023, 03:49:06 PM
https://twitter.com/georgelazenby/status/1625344604844265474?s=19

Hard to watch
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 14, 2023, 05:29:17 PM
https://twitter.com/georgelazenby/status/1625344604844265474?s=19

Hard to watch
I don't think she's ever met a human being.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 14, 2023, 05:59:00 PM
I don't think she's ever met a human being.
I actually like what she's talking about and still manages to make it sound shitty.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 14, 2023, 06:07:46 PM
I actually like what she's talking about and still manages to make it sound shitty.

LOL, that was my immediate reaction as well. I'm assuming she's talking about electrified public transit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 14, 2023, 07:18:06 PM
Who the freak wants to take a bus?

I'm all for public transportation, but I don't think that's the answer
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 14, 2023, 07:44:23 PM
Who the freak wants to take a bus?

I'm all for public transportation

Classic braindead mentality that is all too prevalent today. "Public transportation is great, we need fewer poors on the road so I can drive to my destination quicker!"

I like the bus. I like transit in general. I'd much rather take a bus than drive.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 14, 2023, 08:42:47 PM
 
Classic braindead mentality that is all too prevalent today. "Public transportation is great, we need fewer poors on the road so I can drive to my destination quicker!"

I like the bus. I like transit in general. I'd much rather take a bus than drive.

People are impatient and in a hurry. You'd need a ridiculous amount of buses for them to become time efficient. Once we get into the conversation of driverless busses then you cns make a much stronger argument for them. Until then people would prefer quicker transportation, which is going to be trains and subways.

Explain to me how the freak it's 1000 times easier to travel anywhere by plane than it is by train?

Also you can't even get bus drivers to take kids to school, there's like a ridiculous national shortage of bus drivers. So I'm not sure how anyone could plan on getting the additional number needed to address the public transportation crisis

TLDR freak busses, I want more trains and planes
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 14, 2023, 08:55:51 PM
Buses use existing infrastructure and are by far the most cost efficient form of transit. It's easy to make them quicker, simply prioritise them over private vehicles through infrastructure developments like bus lanes and preferred lights.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 14, 2023, 09:02:12 PM
They're easy but they're slow and inefficient

Most people would prefer to use Uber

Though obviously the poor cannot afford that
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 14, 2023, 09:04:55 PM
https://twitter.com/juliaajohnson_/status/1625580881225080832?s=46&t=VpUyNlwDQG0HaGPxJKY0eg

All time banger
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 15, 2023, 08:48:03 AM
They're easy but they're slow and inefficient

Most people would prefer to use Uber

Though obviously the poor cannot afford that
Can’t beat ‘em, join ‘em - timing’s everything

https://mobile.twitter.com/NJTRANSIT/status/1625257284715569156
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 15, 2023, 11:25:44 AM
https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2023/02/missouri-republicans-minors-open-carry
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 15, 2023, 11:35:46 AM
https://mobile.twitter.com/thedailybeast/status/1625902820263358464

edit: RW pedal to the metal?  v

https://mobile.twitter.com/thedailybeast/status/1625902831608938497
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 15, 2023, 11:50:24 AM
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/the-satanic-temple-abortion-clinic-samuel-alito-b2282495.html

Quote
The Temple has named the initiative “The Samuel Alito’s Mom’s Satanic Abortion Clinic,” in reference to the conservative Justice who wrote the majority opinion that overturned the abortion rights case that had been the law of the land since 1973.

“In 1950, Samuel Alito’s mother did not have options, and look what happened,” said Malcolm Jarry, co-founder of The Satanic Temple.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 15, 2023, 11:55:17 AM
edit: RW pedal to the metal?  v

https://mobile.twitter.com/thedailybeast/status/1625902831608938497
Kim is great. I got an advance copy of her book but I haven't gotten around to it yet.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 15, 2023, 02:40:06 PM
Classic braindead mentality that is all too prevalent today.  “Public transportation is great, we need fewer poors on the road so I can drive to my destination quicker!"

I like the bus. I like transit in general.  I'd much rather take a bus than drive.

I like this take on a classic elemental experience in American culture:  vvv

https://youtu.be/t6OS_ItMGpc 


Your mileage might vary   ; )

https://youtu.be/ilcviZxetww 

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 15, 2023, 03:51:25 PM
Party of small gov't

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/02/seven-states-push-to-require-id-for-watching-porn-online/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 15, 2023, 04:40:06 PM
Party of small gov't

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/02/seven-states-push-to-require-id-for-watching-porn-online/

Party of building databases on middle aged men and their proclivities while the underagers they purport to be protecting all fire up a VPN and carry on as they were, Legislation invented by people who don't understand the first thing about the technologies they're trying to legislate.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 15, 2023, 05:22:13 PM
https://twitter.com/RepErinHealy/status/1625219121687437312?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

You might think this is satire, but of course it isn't.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 15, 2023, 06:19:14 PM
Party of small gov't

https://arstechnica.com/tech-policy/2023/02/seven-states-push-to-require-id-for-watching-porn-online/
Hopefully it's still OK for a teenager to see an obscure, wavy titty on scrambled Cinemax because your parents didn't pay for that channel.  Just the way God intended for kids to learn about hooters.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 15, 2023, 06:35:02 PM
https://twitter.com/RepErinHealy/status/1625219121687437312?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

You might think this is satire, but of course it isn't.
No, because of course she's correct. Unless you actually believe that a child in a household with two same sex parents is less safe. Do you believe that?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 15, 2023, 09:35:31 PM
Safe
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/86/Two_Mommies_%2818895859%29.jpg/640px-Two_Mommies_%2818895859%29.jpg)

Less safe
https://www.tlc.com/shows/1000-lb-sisters/articles/tammy-slaton-is-married-wedding-details
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 15, 2023, 10:16:45 PM
No, because of course she's correct. Unless you actually believe that a child in a household with two same sex parents is less safe. Do you believe that?

Are you saying that in a same sex or alternative couple, there can't be an identifiable mommy and daddy?

Children with two parents in the home unquestionably fair better, this is pretty settled social science, not the kind of excrement spewed by grifters like, say, Ibram Kendi to make a quick buck.

It's an absurd assertion, made even more ridiculous by the offering that such rhetoric is in any way extreme or unAmerican and she's getting rightly excrement on for it.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 16, 2023, 12:00:05 AM
Are you saying that in a same sex or alternative couple, there can't be an identifiable mommy and daddy?

Children with two parents in the home unquestionably fair better, this is pretty settled social science, not the kind of excrement spewed by grifters like, say, Ibram Kendi to make a quick buck.

It's an absurd assertion, made even more ridiculous by the offering that such rhetoric is in any way extreme or unAmerican and she's getting rightly excrement on for it.
Terms such as ‘mother’ and ‘father’ are harmful and should be replaced along with ‘male’ and ‘female’ and replaced with ‘egg producer’ and ‘sperm producer’ so get in step eggproducerfucker

https://keprtv.com/amp/news/nation-world/egg-donor-instead-of-mother-academics-claim-harmful-terms-need-to-be-replaced-eeb-language-project-mother-father-male-female-man-woman

https://twitter.com/Dr_AlexM/status/1622649081083625472



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 16, 2023, 07:40:56 AM
Are you saying that in a same sex or alternative couple, there can't be an identifiable mommy and daddy?

In my experience there generally isn't, same sex couples don't feel the need to adopt hetero norms in order to be good parents.

Quote
Children with two parents in the home unquestionably fair better, this is pretty settled social science, not the kind of excrement spewed by grifters like, say, Ibram Kendi to make a quick buck.

It is, although you have to look at why that is. A massive factor is that a single parent generally has a lower income than a married couple, which means they live in a worse area, which means they don't get access to the better schools - the issue is one of social and demographic disparity at least as much as it is of an individual's ability to be a good parent. But I don't think that that is really the point of the statement she's railing about, which very specifically references "a married mom and dad".

Quote
It's an absurd assertion, made even more ridiculous by the offering that such rhetoric is in any way extreme or unAmerican and she's getting rightly excrement on for it.

It is extreme, because as I've already pointed out the suggestion that a married mom and mom or an unmarried mom and dad somehow create a less safe environment for a child is freaking ludicrous. It's dangerous, because it foments and supports bigotry and prejudice. Sadly I fear that you might be correct that it isn't un-American to do that, but it should be.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: ons on February 16, 2023, 12:23:05 PM
If two parents are safer than one parent, three parents are safer than two parents. Ban non-polyamorous relationships for the safety of our children.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 16, 2023, 12:31:06 PM
….it takes a village….

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 16, 2023, 12:42:40 PM
….it takes a village….



.... to create an idiot?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 16, 2023, 12:55:01 PM
If two parents are safer than one parent, three parents are safer than two parents. Ban non-polyamorous relationships for the safety of our children.

Require there to be at least 2 guys in the marriage and you'll end that pretty quickly.  Lots of guys like the idea of multiple wives (read: sex with multiple women) until there's another dude around.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 16, 2023, 03:38:31 PM
If two parents are safer than one parent, three parents are safer than two parents. Ban non-polyamorous relationships for the safety of our children.
….it takes a village….



.... to create an idiot?
I’m not sure what’s the problem here but the “takes a village” crack was an obvious and facetious continuation of ons’s post, i.e. if two’s better than one and a three’s better than two…and so on…. capiche?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on February 16, 2023, 03:44:17 PM
It is extreme, because as I've already pointed out the suggestion that a married mom and mom or an unmarried mom and dad somehow create a less safe environment for a child is freaking ludicrous. It's dangerous, because it foments and supports bigotry and prejudice. Sadly I fear that you might be correct that it isn't un-American to do that, but it should be.

It's not freaking ludicrous, its in line with the vast majority of studies done on the subject.

With respect to those who get divorced because it's such an individualized determination and there's obvious merit towards getting out due to the damage of a horrible, toxic marriage outweighing the benefits of staying with someone "for the children", it does make it incumbent on said divorcee to expend that much more effort. And unfortunately, at least in my very very (thankfully) brief foray into matrimonial law, the children are largely ignored if not malignantly used as pawns in said situations.

If two parents are safer than one parent, three parents are safer than two parents. Ban non-polyamorous relationships for the safety of our children.

Lol.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 16, 2023, 04:24:55 PM
It's not freaking ludicrous, its in line with the vast majority of studies done on the subject.

Please cite such studies, from credible organisations and not some kind of Falwell-adjacent thinktank, that demonstrate that a child is safer being brought up by heterosexual married parents than by heterosexual unmarried parents, or by married homosexual parents.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 16, 2023, 04:26:34 PM

I’m not sure what’s the problem here but the “takes a village” crack was an obvious and facetious continuation of ons’s post, i.e. if two’s better than one and a three’s better than two…and so on…. capiche?



I did indeed capiche. It was a lazy play on the generic punchline of of a village idiot.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 19, 2023, 07:53:00 AM
The cruelty is the point

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/18/florida-abortion-law-couple-birth
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 19, 2023, 10:28:07 AM
Religious craziness is one of the most cripplingly absurd freaking problems with Healthcare in this country
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 20, 2023, 07:32:33 PM
This guy sounds pretty awesome.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/02/20/activist-pastor-running-wisconsin-supreme-court-00083521

I have no idea whether he has a chance of succeeding - the article doesn't exactly ring with optimism - and it would be my guess that if he were elected to the Supreme Court he'd lose a lot of his ability to do the good he's currently doing, but the world definitely needs more people like this sitting in judgement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 21, 2023, 11:30:31 AM
Parts of America appeared to be in the middle of a very significant mental health crisis.

https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/02/21/michigan-christian-nationalists-00083251
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 24, 2023, 07:29:20 PM
https://www.newsweek.com/tennessee-republicans-vote-make-drag-shows-felonies-1783489

Why don't they just skip to the end game and legislate to make voting Democrat illegal?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 24, 2023, 07:31:45 PM
No, sorry, wait, I thought that was the most stupid thing that Republicans did today, but of course I really shouldn't underestimate the ever increasing depths of stupidity to which Republicans and their voters are willing to dig.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/miami/news/florida-county-republican-party-votes-to-ban-the-covid-19-vaccine/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 27, 2023, 11:59:12 AM
I feel like this quote helps Democrats at least as much as it does Repubicans:

Quote
While not confirming his bid for the White House in 2024, DeSantis has long been thought to be the main challenger to Donald Trump for the GOP presidential nomination.

In an interview with Fox News host Brian Kilmeade, Bush described DeSantis as a "serious contender" in Republican politics who has "shown that Florida can be a model for the future of our country."

https://www.newsweek.com/ron-desantis-fascist-ruth-ben-ghiat-1784017
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 27, 2023, 12:01:24 PM
I feel like this quote helps Democrats at least as much as it does Repubicans:

https://www.newsweek.com/ron-desantis-fascist-ruth-ben-ghiat-1784017

I've always said it's in the best interest of humanity to keep Florida from spreading.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 28, 2023, 10:27:07 AM
No, sorry, wait, I thought that was the most stupid thing that Republicans did today, but of course I really shouldn't underestimate the ever increasing depths of stupidity to which Republicans and their voters are willing to dig.

https://www.cbsnews.com/amp/miami/news/florida-county-republican-party-votes-to-ban-the-covid-19-vaccine/
“Because the Republican Party of Lee County has no power per so, DeSantis can just ignore it if he chooses.”

Dollar to a stale doughnut this goes nowhere…
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 28, 2023, 10:29:27 AM
“Because the Republican Party of Lee County has no power per so, DeSantis can just ignore it if he chooses.”

Dollar to a stale doughnut this goes nowhere…

Of course it won't, but the fact that they're even doing it as a performative exercise is pretty staggering.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 28, 2023, 02:34:37 PM
Hard pass

https://twitter.com/kathleenromig/status/1630650398129246209?t=vYhEZirVbnjaesgEOtPswg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 28, 2023, 05:18:08 PM
Hard pass

https://twitter.com/kathleenromig/status/1630650398129246209?t=vYhEZirVbnjaesgEOtPswg&s=19

Let's go full France on this one.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 28, 2023, 05:37:14 PM
Let's go full France on this one.
There has to be some combination of bad proposed legislation and it getting a certain amount of traction that would trigger a response like that here.

This one will be dead in the water though.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 28, 2023, 08:53:10 PM
Goodbye Beetlejuice

https://www.politico.com/2023-election/results/chicago-mayor/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on February 28, 2023, 09:14:28 PM
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/8/80/Raccoon-eyes.jpg/240px-Raccoon-eyes.jpg)

https://twitter.com/royalpratt/status/1499367993888972800

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on March 01, 2023, 04:45:05 PM
(https://preview.redd.it/8th7qq31i7la1.jpg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=70b4c7bc038de80fdf3df9d523cdb4059f3e8387)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 02, 2023, 10:29:51 PM
https://youtu.be/MC_Gh3-l1Wo


S T F U   ….  pls



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 02, 2023, 10:46:09 PM
Randi could juggle water balloons filled with diarrhea and she'd still be right about this particular issue.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 03, 2023, 08:16:46 AM
Like the imagery B but the shrillness of that strident bag sounds like bagged diarrhea cut open. 
Loan forgiveness violates separation of powers and in my view is unconstitutional.

Speaking of teachers/education, ‘March 3rd’ (1952) represents a milestone in American education; on this day the SCOTUS upheld a New York statute known as the “Fineberg Law” which prohibited communist teachers from teaching in public schools (which was opposed by among others, the teachers union).

https://www.history.com/.amp/this-day-in-history/supreme-court-rules-on-communist-teachers

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 03, 2023, 08:28:00 AM
Randi could juggle water balloons filled with diarrhea and she'd still be right about this particular issue.

She's absolutely spot on. The more time I spend thinking about it, the more offended I am by the entire concept of student debt.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 05, 2023, 11:50:15 AM
yin yang

https://abc7ny.com/amp/george-santos-latest-rally-drag-out/12913954/

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp-video/mmvo164450885537

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 06, 2023, 07:33:17 AM
But TikTok is giving your information to the evil See See Pee

https://www.businessinsider.com/police-getting-help-social-media-to-prosecute-people-seeking-abortions-2023-2?r=US&IR=T
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 06, 2023, 08:49:59 AM
But TikTok is giving your information to the evil See See Pee

https://www.businessinsider.com/police-getting-help-social-media-to-prosecute-people-seeking-abortions-2023-2?r=US&IR=T
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a8/%22Give_Mother_the_Vote%2C_We_Need_It%2C%22_poster_by_Rose_O%27Neill%2C_c._1915.jpg/395px-%22Give_Mother_the_Vote%2C_We_Need_It%2C%22_poster_by_Rose_O%27Neill%2C_c._1915.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 08, 2023, 03:32:26 PM
Sean O'Brien for President

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/you-gonna-tell-me-to-shut-my-mouth-senate-hearing-goes-off-rails-as-teamster-president-and-oklahoma-republican-go-to-war/ar-AA18nAmS
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 08, 2023, 05:31:40 PM
Sean O'Brien for President

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/politics/you-gonna-tell-me-to-shut-my-mouth-senate-hearing-goes-off-rails-as-teamster-president-and-oklahoma-republican-go-to-war/ar-AA18nAmS
This screams Dana White

Ironically, GOP'er Markwayne Mullin appears to have some Liz Warren in him:
https://www.indianz.com/News/2022/11/08/markwayne-mullin-becomes-first-native-u-s-senator-in-nearly-two-decades/

And at the same time SO'B comes from a Boston truck driver family background and probably still carries some rough 'n tumble 'Teamster' in him as well

pay-per-view (winnings go to either the Cherokee Nation Foundation or an I.B.T. affiliated charity)


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 09, 2023, 11:10:19 AM
lolgeography

How is El Paso not the border?(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230309/78216a868117dd03c2adc7ed572aedc4.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230309/d401b27383b94399450d0306ec3cb472.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 09, 2023, 11:14:32 AM
Be fair, you can't expect Canadians to have a strong sense of American geography.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 09, 2023, 02:00:32 PM
https://www.lgbtqnation.com/2023/03/gop-lt-gov-left-heart-emojis-all-over-a-gay-mans-racy-instagram/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 11, 2023, 11:47:01 AM
https://twitter.com/patriottakes/status/1633542947936296966?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 13, 2023, 06:37:10 PM
It's amazing how quickly the people responsible for deregulating banks agreed to blame "wokeness" for the consequences of their actions.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 13, 2023, 06:47:38 PM
https://fortune.com/2023/03/10/silicon-valley-bank-chief-risk-officer/amp/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 14, 2023, 09:55:58 AM
But why

https://twitter.com/matthewkassel/status/1635648581007712256?t=Y_WgEqOLtdLVk0A_s895tg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 14, 2023, 01:20:26 PM
But why

https://twitter.com/matthewkassel/status/1635648581007712256?t=Y_WgEqOLtdLVk0A_s895tg&s=19

^ Why?  For the same reason (after dropping the “nursing home” ball) a cynical grandstanding son of a bitch has the consummate gall to publish a self-congratulatory book on lessons of leadership to be learned at the feet of oneself.

 “I am going to call the question for Democrats.  Do you stand with Israel or do you stand against Israel, because silence is not an option.” — Andrew Cuomo, posturing 24-carat ‘Moreland Commission’ phony

And let’s exalt in our ‘native character’ by changing the Tappan Zee Bridge’s name back to the Tappan Zee Bridge already!  8)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 14, 2023, 02:08:29 PM
But why

https://twitter.com/matthewkassel/status/1635648581007712256?t=Y_WgEqOLtdLVk0A_s895tg&s=19

Phase one in his inevitable party switch.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 14, 2023, 10:16:35 PM
https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1635835789266264064?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Can’t say this without sounding cruel but this guy never should have been a candidate for this job. Got looked at like a smear campaign by the right but there were objective concerns about his health and ability to do the job

Still glad Dr Oz lost tho
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 16, 2023, 04:16:09 PM
https://www.reuters.com/business/finance/credit-suisse-borrow-up-54-bln-it-seeks-calm-investor-fears-2023-03-16/

Imagine thinking that you need more legislation governing women's bodies and drag shows, and less governing banks and freight trains.

How mentally ill would you have to be to vote for that?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on March 16, 2023, 04:19:07 PM
https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1635835789266264064?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Can’t say this without sounding cruel but this guy never should have been a candidate for this job. Got looked at like a smear campaign by the right but there were objective concerns about his health and ability to do the job

Still glad Dr Oz lost tho

I don't see what the big deal is, judging by the current president the left has absolutely no issue voting in people who are demonstratively braindead.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 16, 2023, 05:24:26 PM
I don't see what the big deal is, judging by the current president the left has absolutely no issue voting in people who are demonstratively braindead.
https://twitter.com/POTUS/status/1636405477734064136?t=fFogtK_s5FAYhYde7l9vRQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 19, 2023, 09:02:44 AM
https://twitter.com/AP_Politics/status/1637091582099726338?t=IXbAWMLnkMB7ZFKv4PtD5Q&s=19

Did you guys know criticism of the dysfunction of the US is ackshully Russian propaganda?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 19, 2023, 11:53:10 AM
I did not have sex
with that woman!”

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/eb/%D0%9F%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%82_%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BD.jpg/160px-%D0%9F%D0%BB%D0%B0%D0%BA%D0%B0%D1%82_%D0%A1%D0%BE%D0%B1%D1%8F%D0%BD%D0%B8%D0%BD.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 21, 2023, 09:19:21 AM
Sweet consequences

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/20/idaho-bonner-hospital-baby-delivery-abortion-ban
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 21, 2023, 11:12:24 AM
Sweet consequences

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/20/idaho-bonner-hospital-baby-delivery-abortion-ban

OD’ing on Freedom
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on March 21, 2023, 12:48:23 PM
Sweet consequences

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2023/mar/20/idaho-bonner-hospital-baby-delivery-abortion-ban
DIY childbirth

https://www.verywellfamily.com/how-to-cut-an-umbilical-cord-2752960#:~:text=Using%20sterile%20scissors%2C%20cut%20between,wait%2C%20the%20less%20blood.)

https://youtu.be/yXmnmvDl-ao





Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 30, 2023, 08:10:54 PM
https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3wgv5/missouri-voted-to-defund-public-libraries-book-bans
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 30, 2023, 09:46:45 PM
https://www.vice.com/en/article/y3wgv5/missouri-voted-to-defund-public-libraries-book-bans

Defunding libraries entirely sounds pretty idiotic

But from the article this stems from this

Quote
Since it was first enacted in August, librarians and other educators have faced misdemeanor charges punishable by up to a year in jail or a $2,000 fine for giving students access to books the state has deemed sexually explicit. The Missouri law defined explicit sexual material as images “showing human masturbation, deviate sexual intercourse,” “sexual intercourse, direct physical stimulation of genitals, sadomasochistic abuse,” or showing human genitals

We all are aware of porn and the internet. But I don't think trying to keep those things out of public library is unreasonable either.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 30, 2023, 11:17:51 PM
Defunding libraries entirely sounds pretty idiotic

But from the article this stems from this

We all are aware of porn and the internet. But I don't think trying to keep those things out of public library is unreasonable either.

Lol, lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 30, 2023, 11:23:00 PM
Guys my sources are saying the next Lection is gonna be rigged too
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 01, 2023, 09:03:13 AM
Man surprised by the consequences of his life's work

https://twitter.com/LHSummers/status/1641831721178939392?t=YWOBksUCR5uMDOe3cpC7ng&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 01, 2023, 10:26:57 AM
Man surprised by the consequences of his life's work

https://twitter.com/LHSummers/status/1641831721178939392?t=YWOBksUCR5uMDOe3cpC7ng&s=19
He play in that 80’s band The Police?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 06, 2023, 07:14:29 PM
Former Speaker of the House and custodian of the National Funbags appeared in NYC yesterday with noted New York Times columnist Paul Krugman being heckled by antiwar protesters. 

The “paper of record” not surprisingly didn’t touch this with a 10 foot pole…the fourth estate with its selective tastes and all…

”I came to see a warmonger but you’re a sad old drunk!”  lol….ouch

https://twitter.com/ricwe123/status/1643367511247790087
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 06, 2023, 07:45:14 PM
Former Speaker of the House and custodian of the National Funbags appeared in NYC yesterday with noted New York Times columnist Paul Krugman being heckled by antiwar protesters. 

The “paper of record” not surprisingly didn’t touch this with a 10 foot pole…the fourth estate with its selective tastes and all…

”I came to see a warmonger but you’re a sad old drunk!”  lol….ouch

https://twitter.com/ricwe123/status/1643367511247790087


The interesting part is most of these protestor were liberals
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 16, 2023, 05:47:13 PM
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1646691239532826624?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 16, 2023, 07:56:13 PM
https://twitter.com/thehill/status/1646691239532826624?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

That's good, right? You spend American taxpayers' money on hiring American companies to improve American infrastructure. It's a bit pathetic that this is even considered notable, it's Government 101 and a government that neglects to do this is failing in its most basic of responsibilities.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on April 16, 2023, 11:38:46 PM
That's good, right? You spend American taxpayers' money on hiring American companies to improve American infrastructure. It's a bit pathetic that this is even considered notable, it's Government 101 and a government that neglects to do this is failing in its most basic of responsibilities.

I think the real answer is depends on how much money should it cost to repair 9 critical bridges.

Is 300 million a good deal?

I have no freaking idea, but that seems incredibly high to me

Especially when

Quote
According to a report from the American Road and Transportation Builders Association, nearly 80,000 bridges need replacing and roughly 45,000 are rated in poor condition with repairs long overdue.


At 33 million a bridge that should only cost 2,640,000,000,000

Whatever the freak that number is

Obviously both are without context, and not every bridge will be thst expensive
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 17, 2023, 06:22:46 AM
"$$ Why daddy?"      "Why?..read below sonny boy"
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/79/Beau_and_lloyd_Bridges_1992.jpg/320px-Beau_and_lloyd_Bridges_1992.jpg)


https://theweek.com/articles/449646/why-expensive-build-bridge-america



(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/4/4a/Tacoma-narrows-bridge-collapse.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/e/ee/Skagit_River_Bridge_collapse_2013-05-26.jpg/320px-Skagit_River_Bridge_collapse_2013-05-26.jpg)
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/7/72/FEMA_-_31388_-_Bridge_collapse_in_Minnesota.jpg/320px-FEMA_-_31388_-_Bridge_collapse_in_Minnesota.jpg)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 17, 2023, 10:49:45 AM
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/clarence-thomas-financial-disclosure-forms-real-estate_n_643cde8ce4b03031958de79d

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/16/clarence-thomas-has-been-claiming-thousands-of-dollars-annually-from-a-shuttered-real-estate-firm.html

If this was a Democratic Supreme Court judge the outcry would be really something.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 17, 2023, 01:04:49 PM
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/clarence-thomas-financial-disclosure-forms-real-estate_n_643cde8ce4b03031958de79d

https://www.cnbc.com/2023/04/16/clarence-thomas-has-been-claiming-thousands-of-dollars-annually-from-a-shuttered-real-estate-firm.html

If this was a Democratic Supreme Court judge the outcry would be really something.
"Right on Brother John!
  Perks are for jerks....."

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d0/N.J.-Sen.-Robert-Menendez.jpg)

https://portside.org/2020-10-27/heres-case-impeaching-clarence-thomas-most-corrupt-supreme-court-justice


.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 17, 2023, 02:27:18 PM
That's good, right? You spend American taxpayers' money on hiring American companies to improve American infrastructure. It's a bit pathetic that this is even considered notable, it's Government 101 and a government that neglects to do this is failing in its most basic of responsibilities.

It’s pretty pathetic that repairing 9 bridges is noteworthy enough for the VP to be talking about. Pretty sure there’s a few more than that in this country
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on April 17, 2023, 02:35:39 PM
It’s pretty pathetic that repairing 9 bridges is noteworthy enough for the VP to be talking about. Pretty sure there’s a few more than that in this country

I agree, although I don't know the context - if she was in Pennsylvania and talking about 9 bridges in Pennsylvania it would make more sense. It seems like $300M is a pretty trifling amount for anyone to be talking about on a national level, so I'm assuming there was some kind of local slant to the speech.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 17, 2023, 06:14:31 PM
It’s pretty pathetic that repairing 9 bridges is noteworthy enough for the VP to be talking about. Pretty sure there’s a few more than that in this country
I agree, although I don't know the context - if she was in Pennsylvania and talking about 9 bridges in Pennsylvania it would make more sense. It seems like $300M is a pretty trifling amount for anyone to be talking about on a national level, so I'm assuming there was some kind of local slant to the speech.
Simple answer is they just don't have a lot for Kamala to do so they have to give her busywork like this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 17, 2023, 07:45:21 PM
Simple answer is they just don't have a lot for Kamala to do so they have to give her busywork like this.
Just a few days ago Kamala was on the 14th St. Bridge in D.C. to announce a capital improvement project for the bridge.
https://www.dcnewsnow.com/news/local-news/washington-dc/vp-harris-announces-72-million-grant-to-overhaul-dcs-14th-street-bridge/

You may recall this as the same 14th St. Bridge that years back was the scene of a horrific plane crash that killed 72 people

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/4/4a/Air_Florida_Flight_90_tail_section_recovery.jpg/240px-Air_Florida_Flight_90_tail_section_recovery.jpg)

....which prompted Howard Stern (who was working in D.C. at the time) to call the airline the following morning and inquire about the price of a one-way ticket from National Airport to the 14th Street Bridge.     
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on April 17, 2023, 09:00:41 PM
https://news.yahoo.com/house-dem-causes-uproar-making-165105450.html

What a piece of excrement. Isn't this the freak that's so stupid he was worried about Guam tipping over?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 18, 2023, 07:10:40 AM
https://twitter.com/laurenboebert/status/1648083319295188993?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on April 18, 2023, 04:37:31 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/04/18/business/fox-news-dominion-trial-settlement (https://www.nytimes.com/live/2023/04/18/business/fox-news-dominion-trial-settlement)

Quote
Fox News Settles Defamation Suit for $787.5 Million, Dominion Says

What's that, like a month of revenue for Fox News?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on April 18, 2023, 08:10:43 PM
The party of small government (wants you to report any suspicious trans activity)

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230419/4fbd795dfdb357dfb8d17c68ba24330e.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 18, 2023, 09:36:24 PM
“Send locations of hot transgender dick”
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 18, 2023, 10:19:25 PM
News: I'm told that, as part of the terms of its settlement, Fox News  will *not* have to acknowledge ON AIR that it told lies about Dominion in the wake of the 2020 election. Fox did acknowledge falsehoods in its statement. But don't expect hosts to have to read statements.

lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 18, 2023, 10:52:43 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2023/04/15/upshot/bans-transgender-teenagers.html

puberty blockers…cross-sex hormones….transition surgery….under 18…

I’m betwixt a maelstrom and malestorm of emotions on this one..

Like, do I really want to die on this mons pubis?   
.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 21, 2023, 12:19:32 AM
https://peoplesdispatch.org/2023/04/20/black-liberation-organizers-indicted-for-opposing-war/

shhh
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 25, 2023, 10:35:20 PM
https://twitter.com/breaking911/status/1651062191347433473?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

She is a rare talent
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 26, 2023, 10:29:06 AM
https://twitter.com/nobleqali/status/1651105162910416898?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 26, 2023, 11:08:23 AM
https://twitter.com/breaking911/status/1651062191347433473?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

She is a rare talent

^ Dan Quayle with bigger areola (or aerosol as DQ would put it).  The same Kamala who was pulling down robust 2-3% primary support totals is now one wavering octogenarian heartbeat away from 1600 Penn. Ave. as leader of the free world?...after polling a whoppin' 2-3%? 

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/fr/0/09/Democracy_now.jpg)

Thx Willie Brown; solid make up call Sloop Joe B.

"What a waste it is to lose one's mind. Or not to have a mind is being very wasteful. How true that is."
-Dan Quayle


.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on April 26, 2023, 08:25:18 PM
'my country 'tis of Thee'    "THEY!...THEY!...THEY!"
https://twitter.com/greg_price11/status/1650634886372376584

https://www.westernstandard.news/news/vermont-school-cancels-using-female-and-male/article_0ace711e-e478-11ed-9604-dff983276110.html


If only Anita Rooster were around today.....lmao...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anita_Bryant#/media/File:Save_Our_Children_Fundraising_card.jpg

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on April 29, 2023, 09:12:18 AM
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1652045992030511108?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Lmfao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on April 29, 2023, 01:00:11 PM
https://twitter.com/atrupar/status/1652045992030511108?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Lmfao

I need to party with Senator Limmer
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 01, 2023, 06:33:03 AM
The urge to defend DiFi at all costs is baffling to me.

https://twitter.com/whstancil/status/1652740690671984643?t=YkAzbpqqMX5DQlQy_OEZBA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on May 01, 2023, 07:02:19 AM
The urge to defend DiFi at all costs is baffling to me.

https://twitter.com/whstancil/status/1652740690671984643?t=YkAzbpqqMX5DQlQy_OEZBA&s=19
So how they handle their presidential nominees too then ?

Lol

Theyre running out of cue cards and reporter profiles with pre determined questions on his cheat sheet lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on May 02, 2023, 07:58:29 PM
(https://i.redd.it/1rr1fnatvixa1.jpg)

Good, get it done.  freaking weirdest buddy cop movie ever but get it done. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on May 02, 2023, 08:02:05 PM
It's probably the case that each party sent out their most polarizing figure to guarantee this thing wouldn't have popular support. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 03, 2023, 08:03:17 AM
Pelosi will never let this excrement pass
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on May 09, 2023, 04:45:39 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/09/politics/george-santos-charged-justice-department/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/09/politics/george-santos-charged-justice-department/index.html)

Terrible Tuesday for piece of excrement New Yorkers 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 09, 2023, 07:56:04 PM
https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/09/politics/george-santos-charged-justice-department/index.html (https://www.cnn.com/2023/05/09/politics/george-santos-charged-justice-department/index.html)

Terrible Tuesday for piece of excrement New Yorkers 

I think it's important that we focus on the real issues here.

Quote
“The truth has finally come out,” said Gregory Morey-Parker, who also accused Santos of stealing his scarf. An allegation, like so many others, that Santos denies.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 09, 2023, 10:41:06 PM
It's almost like George Santos is the only politician to lie about his background.

Certainly, we've never seen Democrats lie about say...native american heritage. Or service in Vietnam.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 09, 2023, 11:09:56 PM
Gotta defend an obvious sack of excrement grifter as long as they have an R!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on May 09, 2023, 11:17:18 PM
Gotta defend an obvious sack of excrement grifter as long as they have an R!

Where did I defend anything? Nice projection!

It's not a defense of George Santos to point out the absurdity of the attention this is getting when we have two sitting senators who were caught red handed when it came to their ethnic origin or military service, and yet that was either totally ignored or attempts were made to completely sweep it under the rug.

For the record, freak the three of them. So there, you can hop off my johnson now.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 10, 2023, 09:00:24 AM
https://twitter.com/cnn/status/1656296215540125696?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 10, 2023, 09:01:41 AM
Where did I defend anything? Nice projection!

It's not a defense of George Santos to point out the absurdity of the attention this is getting when we have two sitting senators who were caught red handed when it came to their ethnic origin or military service, and yet that was either totally ignored or attempts were made to completely sweep it under the rug.

For the record, freak the three of them. So there,

you can hop off my johnson now.
”You can hop on my johnson-NOW!”
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c3/37_Lyndon_Johnson_3x4.jpg/180px-37_Lyndon_Johnson_3x4.jpg)
Johnson’s johnson trumps Johnson and Johnson.

As for Santos, not surprising the wannabe gash’s getting all-news-all-the-time attention given his non-stop lying derriere Pinocchio as political debutant entry into the political areana, and that he does so as an ‘R’ all the more newsworthy (e.g. the NYT’s ‘Santos alerts’ on my iPhone have been buzzing all morning).  Worldviews, it’s what engenders 24/7 coverage vis-a-vis *nothingburger crickets*

Santos deserves everything he gets.  He made his mark on a bed of lies and now’s faced with charges of money laundering, etc.??  Bad stock…sell.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on May 10, 2023, 12:30:02 PM
(https://i.redd.it/9keakokgs0za1.png)

A man of his word
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 10, 2023, 03:05:58 PM
(https://i.redd.it/9keakokgs0za1.png)

A man of his word

Nice
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 10, 2023, 06:06:50 PM
Santy arrested on fraud charges..

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/05/10/briefing/george-santos-charges-inflation-data-slowing.html


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 10, 2023, 07:14:36 PM
(https://i.redd.it/jzsaqved04za1.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 10, 2023, 07:17:12 PM
Term and age limits would be nice.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on May 10, 2023, 09:17:19 PM
(https://external-preview.redd.it/_TQgvO15QrsIxVjrPr_do-JCXLBjyzfuqPXmFmPGcbo.jpg?auto=webp&v=enabled&s=4bdaa51a45d49cf8e4bd861c4adc00a0a63e09a0)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 10, 2023, 09:48:55 PM
(https://i.redd.it/jzsaqved04za1.jpg)

This shouldn’t count if she can’t open that other eye
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 10, 2023, 10:05:46 PM
(https://i.ibb.co/nswXgT3/EA248-E3-A-081-B-4957-B894-A0249467701-A.jpg) (https://ibb.co/SX6ks2Q)

*cough* ELDER ABUSE *cough*

Feels like some shitty game of thrones storyline
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 11, 2023, 10:08:36 AM
^ *** WEEKEND AT DIANE’S ***


https://amp.cnn.com/cnn/2023/05/11/us/title-42-what-happens-next/index.html

Kam ala  Kam ala  whereeveryouare…

https://youtu.be/0RHsb9LnD9Q

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: IATA on May 11, 2023, 10:21:17 AM
feinstein dosent even freaking know where she is, her troglodyte staff needs to freak off so someone can push her off devils slide
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 11, 2023, 12:34:56 PM
Unserious about winning.

https://twitter.com/mstratford/status/1656697645786710020?t=8iB5TV9IB-0FPC1R7Dhozw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 11, 2023, 05:00:58 PM
https://twitter.com/davidastinwalsh/status/1656629996604084231?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 11, 2023, 09:19:10 PM
*off-putting forced laugh*

https://twitter.com/Spriter99880/status/1656754646344499201?t=v70OZO_U63t-6JpeeRZvKg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on May 11, 2023, 09:30:05 PM
vawium
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 11, 2023, 10:57:00 PM
feinstein dosent even freaking know where she is, her troglodyte staff needs to freak off so someone can push her off devils slide
SF chick……have that ruin soak in the Sutro Baths…

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/b/bb/The_Sutro_Baths%2C_San_Francisco%2C_California_LCCN2013630059.tif/lossy-page1-320px-The_Sutro_Baths%2C_San_Francisco%2C_California_LCCN2013630059.tif.jpg)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 11, 2023, 11:18:05 PM
*off-putting forced laugh*

https://twitter.com/Spriter99880/status/1656754646344499201?t=v70OZO_U63t-6JpeeRZvKg&s=19

*US Vice President Kamala Harris appeared in public in a very typical state
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 11, 2023, 11:18:41 PM
That’s gotta be drugs btw. That or she actually is a lizard person/robot
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 12, 2023, 12:44:08 PM
That’s gotta be drugs btw. That or she actually is a lizard person/robot

It can be two things.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 12, 2023, 05:01:11 PM
https://twitter.com/DavidBakhtiari/status/1656475445443928065

https://twitter.com/AaronRodgers12/status/1656476545265827840
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on May 16, 2023, 09:46:44 PM
https://www.businessinsider.com/dianne-feinstein-havent-been-gone-senate-2023-5 (https://www.businessinsider.com/dianne-feinstein-havent-been-gone-senate-2023-5)

This freaking chick...

Quote
"No, I haven't been gone," she told the Times' Ben Oreskes on Tuesday when asked how her Senate colleagues have responded to her return. "You should follow the — I haven't been gone, I've been working."

Oreskes then asked her whether she had been working from home.

"No, I've been here. I've been voting," she said. "Please, you either know or don't know."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 16, 2023, 10:32:38 PM
Who remembers this? (Obviously not DiFi)

https://www.politico.com/story/2018/05/04/obama-dianne-feinstein-endorsement-569178
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 16, 2023, 10:33:34 PM
What’s hilarious is she would get re-elected if she ran again
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 17, 2023, 08:19:23 AM
What’s hilarious is she would get re-elected if she ran again
The San Francisco fog has rolled in:

https://thehill.com/homenews/senate/4007624-feinstein-i-havent-been-gone-ive-been-working/amp/

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on May 17, 2023, 08:45:00 AM
Good news aspiring cocksmiths of JO-ville: while Lauren Boebert’s Shooter’s Grill may be closed, the hate fvck queen herself is now wiide open for business:

https://coloradosun.com/2023/05/16/lauren-boebert-divorce-filing/

https://youtu.be/912DKxD0H1U

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 23, 2023, 02:33:32 PM
https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1661052815366668313?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Lmfao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 23, 2023, 02:37:49 PM
https://twitter.com/therecount/status/1661052815366668313?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Lmfao

Telling the entire legislature that your third kid was an accident.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 23, 2023, 03:02:54 PM
Telling the entire legislature that your third kid was an accident.

And being so utterly dumb as to try and make a case that it made sense to have a child because birth control was too expensive.

/selfawarewolves
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 24, 2023, 09:58:29 AM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1661335737638297600?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1661038878680051714?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Shot, chaser
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on May 24, 2023, 10:12:29 AM
https://twitter.com/mtgreenee/status/1661335737638297600?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

https://twitter.com/nytimes/status/1661038878680051714?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Shot, chaser

And a Jaegerbomb to finish.

https://nypost.com/2023/05/22/marjorie-taylor-greene-defends-boyfriend-after-old-drag-video-goes-viral/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on May 24, 2023, 01:03:03 PM
(https://preview.redd.it/yvlc7ymbws1b1.png?width=414&format=png&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=97fb2157cf8dde8ebb179ec1dcbc96ced868645c)

(https://preview.redd.it/llnaqj8dws1b1.png?width=402&format=png&auto=webp&v=enabled&s=ff4340d130dd6dd186a56744864ab139a765c169)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on May 31, 2023, 02:17:49 PM
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/30/chris-stewart-resign-congress-00099283 (https://www.politico.com/news/2023/05/30/chris-stewart-resign-congress-00099283)

This seems abrupt.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on May 31, 2023, 03:30:30 PM
https://twitter.com/sensanders/status/1663984232073445395?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Based
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on June 06, 2023, 03:41:16 PM
https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/06/merck-sues-hhs-drug-negotiation-00100350 (https://www.politico.com/news/2023/06/06/merck-sues-hhs-drug-negotiation-00100350)

Nationalize Merck.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 06, 2023, 08:23:33 PM
Little Marco

https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1666222782470864896?t=VUM0RYLH88K3RNNTqKvlRw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 08, 2023, 07:40:53 PM
https://www.businessinsider.com/clarence-thomas-supreme-court-voting-rights-alabama-ruling-dissent-2023-6

Quote
Thomas said the Voting Rights Act doesn't require Alabama "intentionally redraw its longstanding congressional districts so that black voters can control a number of seats roughly proportional to the black share of the State's population."

"If it did, the Constitution would not permit it," he wrote.

So, uh, the US Constitution is specifically opposed to representative democracy? That's a read I haven't heard before.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 17, 2023, 03:00:10 AM
That he sounds like Norm MacDonald makes it funny.  That he's a punch drunk zombie should give anyone pause, like holy shlt already

https://twitter.com/redsteeze/status/1669781680796880896
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on June 21, 2023, 08:59:07 AM
https://www.huffpost.com/entry/alito-took-luxury-fishing-vacation-with-gop-billionaire_n_6492e091e4b041b71a131734
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 21, 2023, 02:56:45 PM
^ huffihgton post was a rehash of the original pro publica story

https://www.propublica.org/article/samuel-alito-luxury-fishing-trip-paul-singer-scotus-supreme-court

which in turn.. 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/media/2023/06/21/alito-wsj-propublica-fishing-trip/

which in turn…

https://www.wsj.com/articles/propublica-misleads-its-readers-alito-gifts-disclosure-alaska-singer-23b51eda


Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 25, 2023, 08:56:01 PM
I hate it here

https://youtu.be/JjY14FCazoA

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on June 27, 2023, 09:13:34 AM
Impressive ratio

https://twitter.com/ScottforFlorida/status/1673662921652551680?t=kXBoEhk7sWjnhc-fSfLEEg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on June 27, 2023, 12:21:32 PM
Impressive ratio

https://twitter.com/ScottforFlorida/status/1673662921652551680?t=kXBoEhk7sWjnhc-fSfLEEg&s=19

We like capitalism, please do not spend money in our state.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 27, 2023, 01:17:21 PM
 🇨🇺 BEFORE 🇨🇺

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/c/c9/Refugees_on_a_boat_crossing_the_Mediterranean_sea%2C_heading_from_Turkish_coast_to_the_northeastern_Greek_island_of_Lesbos%2C_29_January_2016.jpg/800px-Refugees_on_a_boat_crossing_the_Mediterranean_sea%2C_heading_from_Turkish_coast_to_the_northeastern_Greek_island_of_Lesbos%2C_29_January_2016.jpg)

🇺🇸 AFTER  🇺🇸
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/5/59/2017_Boston_Public_Garden_Swan_Boats_from_west_closeup.jpg/640px-2017_Boston_Public_Garden_Swan_Boats_from_west_closeup.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 27, 2023, 03:40:47 PM
Sounds like the Hunter and the hunted

https://www.cnbc.com/amp/2023/06/22/george-santos-bail-bond-guarantor-names.html?recirc=taboolainternal

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 28, 2023, 01:58:16 PM
This is cute and potentially awesome - two thick mics going at it.

During a Bernie Sanders-chaired Senate hearing Teamsters leader Sean O’Brian and Oklahoma Sen. Markwayne Mullin trade barbs.  Now the potentially fun part:

The Teamster’s challenge….

https://twitter.com/TeamsterSOB/status/1671556346246725638 


….and the Senator’s response:

https://twitter.com/SenMullin/status/1673328467964837891/photo/1

Now while a Teamster leader’s probably a rough ‘n tumble-type guy it should also be noted that the Okie senator’s a former MMA fighter.

Undercard to the Musk - Zuckerberg tilt?




Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on June 29, 2023, 09:18:20 PM
Soapbox ramble:
Personally I was and am still in favor of affirmative action and didn’t care much for today’s SCOTUS ruling.  At the same time I don’t think ‘diversity’ serves as the most effective all-purpose buzzword (looking at today’s protests). 

Imho, while POC have historically taken it on the chin, in answer to today’s court ruling Harvard, UNC et al’s admissions policy should now read that as a result of the ‘quality of education imbalance’ in secondary schools as it pertains to economic demographics, candidates from disadvantaged districts will be given circumstantial consideration when deemed appropriate, i.e. still assist POC while getting around the SCOTUS race-based ban. 


EDIT: TL;DR: affirmative action will still be alive and well…schools will just have to be more nuanced (‘$’) about it
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 01, 2023, 09:17:02 PM
https://jalopnik.com/state-senator-arrested-for-keying-car-with-biden-sucks-1850591807

LOL
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 05, 2023, 10:41:13 PM
In exceedingly good taste 

https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2023/06/29/ask-amy-whos-being-petty-about-the-wedding/




Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 06, 2023, 07:45:05 PM
Rep. caucus votes to expunge the slightly sour and tangy MTG

https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republican-marjorie-taylor-greene-removed-us-house-freedom-caucus-politico-2023-07-06/

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 10, 2023, 09:50:10 AM
https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/michigan-gop-meeting-brawl-video-b2372408.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 11, 2023, 10:28:10 AM
In exceedingly good taste 

https://www.eastbaytimes.com/2023/06/29/ask-amy-whos-being-petty-about-the-wedding/

Would love to know which one of the usual suspects from JO wrote to Amy under a pseudonym.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 15, 2023, 09:40:41 AM
loldemocracy

https://www.propublica.org/article/right-wing-activists-georgia-voter-challenges
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 16, 2023, 05:27:54 PM
The ’Hymietown’ clown is stepping down

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2023/7/14/23794835/rev-jesse-jackson-rainbow-push-president-stepping-down

Noted Jew-smearing ‘civil rights leader’ and former presidential candidate (during his whoring days on the campaign trail) Rev. Jessie Jackson from the cornerstone of American political corruption, Chigago, Illinois (i.e. Cook County) to hand the reins of the Rainbow PUSH Coalition over to Dallas Rev. Frederick Douglas Haynes.

Joe Biden lauded the Rev. as ”a man of God and of the people.”



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 16, 2023, 05:50:57 PM
The ’Hymietown’ clown is stepping down

https://chicago.suntimes.com/2023/7/14/23794835/rev-jesse-jackson-rainbow-push-president-stepping-down

Noted Jew-smearing ‘civil rights leader’ and former presidential candidate (during his whoring days on the campaign trail) Rev. Jessie Jackson from the cornerstone of American political corruption, Chigago, Illinois (i.e. Cook County) to hand the reins of the Rainbow PUSH Coalition over to Dallas Rev. Frederick Douglas Haynes.

Joe Biden lauded the Rev. as ”a man of God and of the people.”
Still (would have been) better than every POTUS of my lifetime.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 16, 2023, 08:53:18 PM
Still (would have been) better than every POTUS of my lifetime.
Lol

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 26, 2023, 11:39:53 PM
https://twitter.com/negroprogrammer/status/1684328711351304194?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Charlie Kirk has yet to comment
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 27, 2023, 12:15:31 AM
Maybe there should be an age limit.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 27, 2023, 01:23:40 PM
https://twitter.com/kenklippenstein/status/1684621670634364929?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Love this excrement
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 27, 2023, 01:32:12 PM
McConnell and Feinstein to be sent to live on a farm upstate with immediate effect, who says no?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 27, 2023, 01:47:57 PM
McConnell and Feinstein to be sent to live on a farm upstate with immediate effect, who says no?

I’m down with this.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on July 27, 2023, 01:49:00 PM
McConnell and Feinstein to be sent to live on a farm upstate with immediate effect, who says no?

But Joe Biden should totally run for another term
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on July 27, 2023, 01:51:49 PM
But Joe Biden should totally run for another term

Correct
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 27, 2023, 01:59:45 PM
Reminder that Obama endorsed Feinstein for reelection in 2018 against another Democrat.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 27, 2023, 03:31:05 PM
Reminder that Obama endorsed Feinstein for reelection in 2018 against another Democrat.
Gotta remember lady di was a spry 85 at the time

Nearly all of these politicians are narcissistic douche bags. McConnell as a latest example is clearly not fit to be in office anymore.  And you can add those conniving scumbags (Biden & Trump) to the list.


..and this is just the House…
10. Danny K. Davis, 81
  9. Jim Clyburn, 82
   8. Nancy Pelosi, 82
   7. Steny Hoyer, 83
   6. Maxine Waters, 84
   5. Hal Rogers, 85
   4. Bill Pascrell, 86
   3. Grace Napolitano,  86
   2. Chuck Grassley, 89
   1. Diane Feinstein, 90

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 27, 2023, 03:34:39 PM
At least Chuck Grassley has entertainment value.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 27, 2023, 04:16:28 PM
At least Chuck Grassley has entertainment value.
True albeit in a nascar-type wreck kind of way (voted to repeal the ACA; not entertaining) 👎

Di Feinstein otoh:

Jack Berman
​(m. 1956; div. 1959)​ 🦪👍

Bertram Feinstein
​(m. 1962; died 1978)​ 🦪😘

​Richard Blum
​(m. 1980; died 2022)​ 🦪👍

Killer pu$$y 🦪 …. muy entretenida 👍 



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 28, 2023, 04:34:46 PM
https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4125436-samuel-alito-on-congress-authority-to-regulate-supreme-court/ (https://thehill.com/regulation/court-battles/4125436-samuel-alito-on-congress-authority-to-regulate-supreme-court/)

Alito getting a little worried that a few of the gifts he's accepted might get him in trouble.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on July 28, 2023, 06:17:29 PM
(https://i.redd.it/y36essfnjpeb1.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 28, 2023, 06:52:17 PM
(https://i.redd.it/y36essfnjpeb1.jpg)

Yeah, makes sense.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on July 30, 2023, 12:00:32 AM
https://twitter.com/CoryBooker/status/1685015955603140608
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 30, 2023, 10:22:01 AM
https://twitter.com/CoryBooker/status/1685015955603140608
Yeah, that tracks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 30, 2023, 03:21:25 PM
lolTexas

https://abc13.com/hisd-libraries-librarians-media-specialists-houston-isd/13548483/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on July 30, 2023, 03:41:43 PM
lolTexas

https://abc13.com/hisd-libraries-librarians-media-specialists-houston-isd/13548483/

What's the point where the US government stages a military intervention in Texas? They have oil.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Heismanberg on July 30, 2023, 04:50:00 PM
lolTexas

https://abc13.com/hisd-libraries-librarians-media-specialists-houston-isd/13548483/

I didn’t think anything would top the floating border wall
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on July 30, 2023, 11:45:07 PM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230731/3613aa5aca88ea08ab5f4006ad71d647.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on July 31, 2023, 04:22:47 PM
https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1686107608690589696?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Apparently (amazingly) George Santos might not be the biggest clown representative from New York not named Jerry Nadler.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 02, 2023, 12:03:25 PM
https://twitter.com/Breaking911/status/1686107608690589696?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

Apparently (amazingly) George Santos might not be the biggest clown representative from New York not named Jerry Nadler.
This guy sucks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 02, 2023, 12:04:09 PM
Thanks Obama

https://twitter.com/LeverNews/status/1686485846621552647?t=5bBWCQYXI3SFAphp8hdgBQ&s=19

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/july-2023-is-hottest-month-ever-recorded-on-earth/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 02, 2023, 01:03:33 PM
Thanks Obama

https://twitter.com/LeverNews/status/1686485846621552647?t=5bBWCQYXI3SFAphp8hdgBQ&s=19

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/july-2023-is-hottest-month-ever-recorded-on-earth/

Let's celebrate with a big glass of Flint, MI water.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 02, 2023, 03:23:07 PM
A+ content

https://twitter.com/seth_hettena/status/1686750210180198400?t=GEfWyY7nB3PwjtYk58m3ww&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 02, 2023, 03:40:33 PM
A+ content

https://twitter.com/seth_hettena/status/1686750210180198400?t=GEfWyY7nB3PwjtYk58m3ww&s=19

This is.... whew. You don't have to read it all, just dive in at any point and you're going to find some pretty heinous behaviour.

https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/23813714-650033_2023_noelle_dunphy_v_rudolph_w_giuliani_et_al_complaint_10
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 04, 2023, 01:34:52 PM
https://twitter.com/nypost/status/1687271650994147328?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 09, 2023, 09:50:32 AM
Let's gooooooo

https://www.tmz.com/2023/08/09/senator-dianne-feinstein-hospitalized-trip-fall-shingles-health-san-francisco/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 09, 2023, 11:59:52 AM
Let's gooooooo

https://www.tmz.com/2023/08/09/senator-dianne-feinstein-hospitalized-trip-fall-shingles-health-san-francisco/

Putting an age cap on political office has to be the most no brainer freaking bipartisan decision humanly possible.

I don't know how this isn't a thing yet (well obviously it's because the only people who could put this into place are 1000 years old)

But seeing dinosaurs like McCain, Feinstein, Biden, and now Trump.

Who the freak can think this is appropriate
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on August 15, 2023, 06:44:08 PM
It's a excrement show

https://twitter.com/AlexShultz/status/1691550329903427600?t=wMOyiDGe7BscvEivvLQSTw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 15, 2023, 07:06:37 PM
It's a excrement show

https://twitter.com/AlexShultz/status/1691550329903427600?t=wMOyiDGe7BscvEivvLQSTw&s=19

Thx Di...even at my age...
(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/e/e3/Jail_Bait_poster.png)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 16, 2023, 01:25:24 PM
 ”play him again Sam”

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/08/16/nyregion/sam-miele-charged-george-santos.html



Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on August 16, 2023, 02:11:19 PM
https://x.com/popcrave/status/1691632327695429665?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Future President
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 16, 2023, 06:22:46 PM
https://x.com/popcrave/status/1691632327695429665?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Future President
Meet the new boss, same as the old gloss…

https://youtu.be/VaSKJ7Z0Y_s




Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 29, 2023, 11:37:00 AM
So Steve Scalise has BLOOD cancer, which is something that is completely different from leukemia.

The human body is truly a horrifying thing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on August 30, 2023, 04:28:17 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/comments/165m5v4/to_give_a_speech/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/therewasanattempt/comments/165m5v4/to_give_a_speech/)

Homeboy's cooked.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 30, 2023, 04:44:16 PM
Turtle soup
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 30, 2023, 05:01:38 PM
Maybe it's time for the weakest chin in America to call it quits.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 30, 2023, 05:57:22 PM
                Mr. Freeze

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/3/3f/Otto_Preminger_Mr._Freeze_Batman_1967.jpg/388px-Otto_Preminger_Mr._Freeze_Batman_1967.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on August 30, 2023, 07:08:39 PM
Can the Dems and Republicans not just agree that it's in everyone's best interests to remove McConnell and Feinstein from their positions, each side is one man down, each gets to put a living and coherent human being in their spot, and move on?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on August 30, 2023, 08:26:10 PM
Can the Dems and Republicans not just agree that it's in everyone's best interests to remove McConnell and Feinstein from their positions, each side is one man down, each gets to put a living and coherent human being in their spot, and move on?

Feinstein is cut and dry

But if you go down the road of McConnell then why not Biden too? I'd say Bernie (dudes freaking 81) but he's surprisingly coherent

Any once you hit 80 you should not be allowed to run for election/reelection
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on August 30, 2023, 08:31:07 PM
Feinstein is cut and dry

But if you go down the road of McConnell then why not Biden too? I'd say Bernie (dudes freaking 81) but he's surprisingly coherent

Any once you hit 80 you should not be allowed to run for election/reelection

Nah, bruh
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: delavan on August 31, 2023, 05:37:46 AM
Their biomarkers have spoken:
now give ‘em their service award medals
and mothball these moldy-minded relics

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/9/93/Cryopreservation.jpg/319px-Cryopreservation.jpg)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/1/13/Deep_freeze.jpg/231px-Deep_freeze.jpg)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 04, 2023, 09:10:54 AM
So Steve Scalise has BLOOD cancer, which is something that is completely different from leukemia.

The human body is truly a horrifying thing.
https://twitter.com/crulge/status/1697013539133903068?t=a-YTpCaKQz9MykKlbegggg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 11, 2023, 06:16:55 PM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12506573/Mother-two-Democratic-congressional-candidate-performed-sex-acts-husband-online-asked-viewers-pay-TIPS.html

(https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/richmond.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/b/26/b265ebfc-fb1e-11ed-8143-c380787c6233/646f960404b73.image.jpg?resize=1200%2C800)

What's that website again, chaturbate?  Damn.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 11, 2023, 06:43:34 PM
So she has an OnlyFans?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 12, 2023, 12:15:28 AM
https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-12506573/Mother-two-Democratic-congressional-candidate-performed-sex-acts-husband-online-asked-viewers-pay-TIPS.html

(https://bloximages.newyork1.vip.townnews.com/richmond.com/content/tncms/assets/v3/editorial/b/26/b265ebfc-fb1e-11ed-8143-c380787c6233/646f960404b73.image.jpg?resize=1200%2C800)

What's that website again, chaturbate?  Damn.
Goochland sighting

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230912/792ad2dea6db07d1777e6266d4230b37.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on September 12, 2023, 12:42:24 AM
Tha' Goooooch.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 12, 2023, 12:48:02 AM
Tha' Goooooch.
I watched Sonic 2 at the Goochland Drive-In and only got two ticks.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 13, 2023, 09:45:31 AM
https://x.com/donlew87/status/1701797341647323485?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Dawg what

https://www.denverpost.com/2023/09/12/lauren-boebert-removed-beetlejuice-musical-denver/

U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert was escorted out of a Sunday night performance of the “Beetlejuice” musical in downtown Denver, accused by venue officials of vaping, singing, recording and “causing a disturbance” during the performance.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 13, 2023, 11:41:23 AM
https://x.com/lizbrownkaiser/status/1701630833398821106?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 15, 2023, 11:23:45 AM
https://x.com/donlew87/status/1701797341647323485?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Dawg what

https://www.denverpost.com/2023/09/12/lauren-boebert-removed-beetlejuice-musical-denver/

U.S. Rep. Lauren Boebert was escorted out of a Sunday night performance of the “Beetlejuice” musical in downtown Denver, accused by venue officials of vaping, singing, recording and “causing a disturbance” during the performance.



https://x.com/edkrassen/status/1702654189745180734?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Is this how far we've fallen as a nation?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on September 15, 2023, 11:42:46 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/Denver/comments/16jtioe/rep_lauren_boebert_and_date_grope_each_others/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/Denver/comments/16jtioe/rep_lauren_boebert_and_date_grope_each_others/)

Ooooooh, an old-fashioned!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 17, 2023, 02:12:15 PM
https://x.com/theserfstv/status/1703206349935649030?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Oh No
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 17, 2023, 02:13:38 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/Denver/comments/16jtioe/rep_lauren_boebert_and_date_grope_each_others/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/Denver/comments/16jtioe/rep_lauren_boebert_and_date_grope_each_others/)

Ooooooh, an old-fashioned!

“She’s mashing it”

(https://y.yarn.co/bdb78e3b-acc7-4a8e-a458-60b59296f625_text.gif)

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 18, 2023, 05:48:12 PM
Who's ready for shutdown chicken?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 18, 2023, 08:53:48 PM
https://x.com/feitsbarstool/status/1703917101835063716?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 18, 2023, 09:41:26 PM
https://x.com/jordanuhl/status/1703910017966178784?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 18, 2023, 09:42:10 PM
I can’t even blame her, Beetlejuice gets me insanely horny
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 19, 2023, 09:06:37 AM
I can’t even blame her, Beetlejuice gets me insanely horny
Mods please do something about this deviant
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on September 19, 2023, 01:09:36 PM
(https://i.gifer.com/18KY.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on September 19, 2023, 02:39:10 PM
https://youtu.be/YqwldD-smEA
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 19, 2023, 03:11:06 PM
https://x.com/magabarbie317/status/1704089006177161327?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Lizard People r back
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 21, 2023, 09:28:23 PM
This sucks

https://twitter.com/laraseligman/status/1704971577559818329?t=T4QFnLTUgsnfvzyX9G-hYw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 21, 2023, 09:30:55 PM
This sucks

https://twitter.com/laraseligman/status/1704971577559818329?t=T4QFnLTUgsnfvzyX9G-hYw&s=19

Why, because it's one less thing to prevent the shutdown or because you love Putin and want him to win?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 21, 2023, 09:40:35 PM
Why, because it's one less thing to prevent the shutdown or because you love Putin and want him to win?
Because ensuring they fight down to the last Ukrainian isn't a huge priority for me
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 22, 2023, 12:02:57 PM
https://www.reddit.com/r/BlackPeopleTwitter/comments/16pdg4u/i_cant_help_it_its_a_shame_what_he_do_to_me_my/ (https://www.reddit.com/r/BlackPeopleTwitter/comments/16pdg4u/i_cant_help_it_its_a_shame_what_he_do_to_me_my/)

I'm all for Putin getting taken down and Ukraine winning but there are a lot of places that money deserves to go outside of the Pentagon and there are a lot of programs within the Pentagon budget aimed at the welfare and treatment of the force and their families that would be a higher priority to me.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 26, 2023, 07:18:13 PM
This is unilaterally good.

https://www.engadget.com/the-fcc-plans-to-restore-obama-era-net-neutrality-rules-184624637.html

I don't give a excrement what your political leanings are, this was a horrible decision to the detriment of everyone who isn't a billionaire media owner.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 26, 2023, 07:20:43 PM
This is unilaterally good.

https://www.engadget.com/the-fcc-plans-to-restore-obama-era-net-neutrality-rules-184624637.html

I don't give a excrement what your political leanings are, this was a horrible decision to the detriment of everyone who isn't a billionaire media owner.

Yes.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 26, 2023, 08:47:59 PM
This is unilaterally good.

https://www.engadget.com/the-fcc-plans-to-restore-obama-era-net-neutrality-rules-184624637.html

I don't give a excrement what your political leanings are, this was a horrible decision to the detriment of everyone who isn't a billionaire media owner.

The regulations themselves are generally good things that I think most people could get behind, but the process could be bad and detrimental.

I was reading up on this and this was one of the more interesting articles on the subject

https://news.bloomberglaw.com/us-law-week/net-neutrality-rules-face-major-questions-buzzsaw-at-high-court

The impression I got from this was basically that trying to push this through might have the unintended effect of making the proposed changes more difficult to actually enact.

Which seems to be a reasonable opinion based on the makeup of the supreme court

And that congress enacting something similar but different would likely be a better strategy, as it would be more likely to stand legal scrutiny
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 26, 2023, 08:53:37 PM
On a related note, I had no idea this was a thing  but apparently numerous (mostly red) states across the country have implemented some pretty draconian mandates for internet porn requiring heavier authenticaton of age (ie submitting a government ID) and several major porn sites (ie pornhub) have completely removed access to their websites in those states.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 28, 2023, 08:24:51 AM
She's the worst

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/26/san-francisco-mayor-drug-testing-00118274
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on September 28, 2023, 01:00:04 PM
She's the worst

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/26/san-francisco-mayor-drug-testing-00118274

"You did a drug, therefore, you deserve to die."
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 28, 2023, 02:39:01 PM
She's the worst

https://www.politico.com/news/2023/09/26/san-francisco-mayor-drug-testing-00118274

I imagine that in general this practice is financially a big L as it's probably just cheaper to pay it out instead of creating a new program that's probably not feasible.

But San Francisco has one of the worst drug epidemics in the country which has been pretty well documented on. And is on track for the most fentanyl deaths ever this year

If you're a local resident you're probably thrilled with them trying anything that can clean up their streets.

Surely there's worse ways to do that than this?

My assumption is this doesn't actually resolve any problems, it just encourages the problem to go elsewhere
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 28, 2023, 02:49:15 PM
I imagine that in general this practice is financially a big L as it's probably just cheaper to pay it out instead of creating a new program that's probably not feasible.

But San Francisco has one of the worst drug epidemics in the country which has been pretty well documented on.

If you're a local resident you're probably thrilled with them trying anything that can clean up their streets.

Surely there's worse ways to do that than this?

They could add summary execution for drug offenses, I guess. That'd be worse.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 28, 2023, 06:05:12 PM


I imagine that in general this practice is financially a big L as it's probably just cheaper to pay it out instead of creating a new program that's probably not feasible.

My assumption is this doesn't actually resolve any problems, it just encourages the problem to go elsewhere

Edited down to the correct parts
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 28, 2023, 07:58:04 PM
They could add summary execution for drug offenses, I guess. That'd be worse.

You're right, checking that someone isn't using the money you're gifting to them won't be for heroin is basically the same as executing them.

(again I think it's a not very efficient policy in general as far as utilization of taxpayer money. However if I lived in the city and thought this would keep mobs of homeless people from shooting up in the street, I'd certainly support it)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on September 28, 2023, 08:00:41 PM

Edited down to the correct parts

Yes those parts are both probably true.

But this is a mayor whose job is to advocate for her constituency. And I assume the locals don't like their streets being littered with homeless drug addicts.

And remember this is San Francisco, so they've tried all the ultra progressive excrement like giving out free crack pipes so people can smoke their drugs and created drug havens for them to have supervised drug use.

This isn't Texas where someone's jsut saying freak the druggies and homeless. This is the beacon of progressiveness that has tried more progressive excrement than probably 99% of the cities in the country
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on September 29, 2023, 08:04:17 AM
The bitch dead:

Dianne Feinstein dead at 185 years old. (https://www.4029tv.com/article/dianne-feinstein-death/45372689)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 29, 2023, 10:32:31 AM
Barbara Lee SZN
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on September 29, 2023, 06:08:52 PM
The bitch dead:

Dianne Feinstein dead at 185 years old. (https://www.4029tv.com/article/dianne-feinstein-death/45372689)
https://twitter.com/SirajAHashmi/status/1707754008863981980
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 29, 2023, 07:13:57 PM
https://twitter.com/SirajAHashmi/status/1707754008863981980
"I know what I'm doing"

*Did freak-all on climate for the rest of her life*
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on September 29, 2023, 07:32:14 PM
"I know what I'm doing"

*Did freak-all on climate for the rest of her life*

She knew what she was doing.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on September 29, 2023, 08:01:06 PM
https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1707791671956590858?t=VvDUkDtraZ9BFLbY4Rb7pw&s=19

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230930/1e3f7ff9d2df9ca2e76c50e8eaf3c833.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on September 29, 2023, 10:14:38 PM
"I know what I'm doing"

*Did freak-all on climate for the rest of her life*

I mean she only exhaled about a dozen or so times in the last year, that's gotta reduce the carbon footprint. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 29, 2023, 10:28:40 PM
https://twitter.com/JStein_WaPo/status/1707791671956590858?t=VvDUkDtraZ9BFLbY4Rb7pw&s=19

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20230930/1e3f7ff9d2df9ca2e76c50e8eaf3c833.jpg)

They could fully fund all of that with 30% of the DoD
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on September 30, 2023, 02:55:34 PM
Lol Jamaal Bowman.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on September 30, 2023, 05:56:53 PM
"I know what I'm doing"

*Did freak-all on climate for the rest of her life*

I saw someone say she’s been in weekend at Bernie’s mode since that clip
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 01, 2023, 10:24:47 PM
freak Gavin Newsom.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 02, 2023, 01:52:46 PM
https://x.com/cramertracker/status/1708611512573604317?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 02, 2023, 01:55:54 PM
https://x.com/cramertracker/status/1708611512573604317?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Fraud

#ITTFFSP
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on October 03, 2023, 03:17:50 PM
McCarthy about to get got.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on October 03, 2023, 03:49:37 PM
He got gotted.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on October 03, 2023, 03:59:34 PM
https://twitter.com/HowardMortman/status/1709310215882219700
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 03, 2023, 05:08:33 PM
McCarthy's successor list:
-Devin McCarty
-Trevor D'Arcy
-just a photo of him in a pair of Groucho Marx disguise glasses with the caption "Is this something?"

#ITTFFSP
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 03, 2023, 05:49:56 PM
McCarthy's successor list:
-Devin McCarty
-Trevor D'Arcy
-just a photo of him in a pair of Groucho Marx disguise glasses with the caption "Is this something?"

#ITTFFSP
-Bobby Valentine with a fake mustache
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 03, 2023, 10:10:27 PM
Mitch McConnell SZN
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 03, 2023, 11:36:49 PM
Mitch McConnell SZN

*buffering* SZN

#ITTFFSP
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 05, 2023, 12:39:37 PM
https://x.com/davenewworld_2/status/1709909043513303446?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

https://x.com/edkrassen/status/1709933462927659137?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 05, 2023, 12:40:30 PM
https://x.com/iapolls2022/status/1709920365248442661?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg


Yeeeeeeks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on October 05, 2023, 12:51:23 PM
https://x.com/iapolls2022/status/1709920365248442661?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg


Yeeeeeeks

Get him gone, Jersey
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 05, 2023, 07:39:04 PM
LOL

https://newrepublic.com/post/175996/republicans-gross-stories-matt-gaetz
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 10, 2023, 01:17:44 PM
Republicans: "We believe in small government, transparency and freedom!"

Also Republicans: https://www.thedailybeast.com/north-carolina-republicans-are-creating-a-secret-police-force
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: steves850 on October 10, 2023, 01:23:27 PM
Republicans: "We believe in small government, transparency and freedom!"

Also Republicans: https://www.thedailybeast.com/north-carolina-republicans-are-creating-a-secret-police-force

The only people that believe the GOP want a "small, transparent government" are boot-licking drones with their heads in the sand. They are more interested in "winning" and "making liberals cry" than actually seeing the country succeed.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 10, 2023, 05:59:21 PM
https://x.com/delbertgseasons/status/1711862585543540870?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Lolol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 11, 2023, 12:30:52 PM
Looks like the GOP are nominating Scalise as McCarthy's replacement, a man who willingly spoke at David Duke's white nationalist convention, and who opposes amongst other things the legalisation of cannabis, gay rights, and acceptance of the scientific evidence for climate change.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 11, 2023, 01:24:12 PM
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna119917
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 11, 2023, 01:40:13 PM
Looks like the GOP are nominating Scalise as McCarthy's replacement, a man who willingly spoke at David Duke's white nationalist convention, and who opposes amongst other things the legalisation of cannabis, gay rights, and acceptance of the scientific evidence for climate change.
-supports a national abortion ban
-voted to overturn the 2020 election
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 12, 2023, 10:16:49 PM
Scalise update: withdrew his candidacy for Speaker because a faction of the Republican representatives felt that the man who compared himself to the leader of the Ku Klux Klan wasn't sufficiently right wing for them.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 19, 2023, 11:57:45 AM
https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2023/10/19/congress/jordans-new-plan-00122465 (https://www.politico.com/live-updates/2023/10/19/congress/jordans-new-plan-00122465)

Jordan to cease Speaker bid, plans to support McHenry.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 20, 2023, 01:54:28 PM
After a third vote in which he lost even more votes, Gym the sexual abuse enabler Jordan has actually given up on his attempts to become speaker. Republicans are now standing around wondering which lunatic to try with next.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 20, 2023, 02:19:37 PM
After a third vote in which he lost even more votes, Gym the sexual abuse enabler Jordan has actually given up on his attempts to become speaker. Republicans are now standing around wondering which lunatic to try with next.

This guy:

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1715441677576376633 (https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1715441677576376633)

Also, nothing but sound logic here:

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1715363245123400085 (https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1715363245123400085)

I don't know why he backed out of the McSherman deal only to embarrass himself further.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 20, 2023, 02:32:10 PM
This guy:

https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1715441677576376633 (https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1715441677576376633)

Apparently not an election denier, so already an improvement on Scalise and Jordan.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 20, 2023, 05:20:25 PM
Picking peanuts out of the excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 20, 2023, 05:29:05 PM
Picking peanuts out of the excrement.
Gaetz saying he'll do everything possible to oppose McHenry getting the job makes me want to see it happen out of spite.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 20, 2023, 05:34:30 PM
https://twitter.com/RickLenzie/status/1715439301926723603?s=20

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on October 20, 2023, 06:11:37 PM
Gaetz saying he'll do everything possible to oppose McHenry getting the job makes me want to see it happen out of spite.

Would be hilarious for 5 of the moderates to call his bluff and say if he votes against a non-maga speaker, they will vote for Jeffries.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 20, 2023, 06:33:18 PM
Would be hilarious for 5 of the moderates to call his bluff and say if he votes against a non-maga speaker, they will vote for Jeffries.
I'd laugh. He's just male Pelosi but I'd laugh.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 20, 2023, 07:06:05 PM
Would be hilarious for 5 of the moderates to call his bluff and say if he votes against a non-maga speaker, they will vote for Jeffries.

It would, but you'd have to find 5 moderates who aren't concerned about getting primaried next year because that's absolutely what would happen to any Republican who broke ranks and voted for a Democrat speaker.

Slightly more possible although still completely not possible would be the Democrats getting together and both nominating and voting for a moderate Republican who hates Trump (maybe Romney?), and then seeing if 5 Republican voters break for him. If they do then they get to further divide the GOP, if they don't then the narrative of the Republicans doing it to themselves becomes set in stone. They can't blame the Dems when the Dems actually offered a Republican speaker on a plate and they chose not to take it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 24, 2023, 09:36:20 PM
https://x.com/repsantosny03/status/1716917346068299995?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Lol, lmao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on October 24, 2023, 09:57:03 PM
It would, but you'd have to find 5 moderates who aren't concerned about getting primaried next year because that's absolutely what would happen to any Republican who broke ranks and voted for a Democrat speaker.

Slightly more possible although still completely not possible would be the Democrats getting together and both nominating and voting for a moderate Republican who hates Trump (maybe Romney?), and then seeing if 5 Republican voters break for him. If they do then they get to further divide the GOP, if they don't then the narrative of the Republicans doing it to themselves becomes set in stone. They can't blame the Dems when the Dems actually offered a Republican speaker on a plate and they chose not to take it.
They will blame the Dems no matter what. Dems shouldn't nominate a GOP speaker. Republicans made this mess and now they have to clean it up. None of this is this speaker nonsense is the Dems' fault.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on October 24, 2023, 11:35:20 PM
Apparently not an election denier, so already an improvement on Scalise and Jordan.

You mean like Hakeem Jeffries?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on October 24, 2023, 11:54:48 PM
It would, but you'd have to find 5 moderates who aren't concerned about getting primaried next year because that's absolutely what would happen to any Republican who broke ranks and voted for a Democrat speaker.

Slightly more possible although still completely not possible would be the Democrats getting together and both nominating and voting for a moderate Republican who hates Trump (maybe Romney?), and then seeing if 5 Republican voters break for him. If they do then they get to further divide the GOP, if they don't then the narrative of the Republicans doing it to themselves becomes set in stone. They can't blame the Dems when the Dems actually offered a Republican speaker on a plate and they chose not to take it.

IIRC the democrats made this offer

There was 3 names on their list. Liz Cheney, Romney, and then some person whose name I've never heard of.

From a Democrat perspective with the current razor thin margins it makes a ton of sense for them to try to get a moderate in control, as it could shift the balance of power in their favor.

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 25, 2023, 05:32:50 AM
Emmer dropped his bid. It's this ahole, now.

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/rcna122019
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 25, 2023, 03:14:39 PM
A far right Christian fundamentalist.

https://newrepublic.com/post/176439/republicans-elect-mike-johnson-speaker-christian-election-denier

The Republican party really does know no bound to the levels of fuckwittery to which it is willing to stoop.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 25, 2023, 04:01:56 PM
I miss Diocletian.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on October 25, 2023, 04:10:19 PM
I miss Diocletian.

It's mostly his fault for failing to actually complete the job.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on October 25, 2023, 06:19:23 PM
 (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20231025/5a63ac103a67428f947bcab94a1e893a.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on October 25, 2023, 07:52:34 PM
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20231025/5a63ac103a67428f947bcab94a1e893a.jpg)
You make an adulterous point.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on October 30, 2023, 11:07:29 PM
https://x.com/leftismforu/status/1718688325073068222?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Charge
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 14, 2023, 02:24:54 PM
https://x.com/halomancer1/status/1724182078374482110?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

99% Hitler was trending so I tried to trace it back
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 14, 2023, 09:39:39 PM
https://www.newsweek.com/kevin-mccarthy-shoves-republican-colleague-sparking-chase-report-1843630

The entire Republican Party appears to be made up of 7th graders.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 15, 2023, 04:59:35 AM
https://www.newsweek.com/kevin-mccarthy-shoves-republican-colleague-sparking-chase-report-1843630

The entire Republican Party appears to be made up of 7th graders.

Sac tapping is the next logical step.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 15, 2023, 02:44:14 PM
https://x.com/acyn/status/1724858598092898373?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on November 15, 2023, 02:48:38 PM
https://x.com/acyn/status/1724858598092898373?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg



but charts!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 15, 2023, 09:27:27 PM
https://x.com/greg_price11/status/1724469208728195430?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
https://x.com/timodc/status/1724785775802499251?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Saw the first clip yesterday, hilarious on its own but the context is freaking amazing
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 15, 2023, 09:28:10 PM
https://x.com/allenanalysis/status/1724984174975545841?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Americans are electing these people, on purpose
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 15, 2023, 09:29:01 PM
https://x.com/wondermann5/status/1724529933240996063?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Alright this guy rocks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on November 16, 2023, 07:54:23 AM
https://x.com/AdamParkhomenko/status/1724927893644390549?s=20
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 16, 2023, 11:26:21 AM
Santos' expenditures from campaign funds include Botox treatments and OnlyFans subscriptions.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/substantial-evidence-rep-george-santos-broke-law-ethics-panel-finds-rcna125335

He has announced he will not be seeking re-election.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 16, 2023, 12:39:24 PM
Santos' expenditures from campaign funds include Botox treatments and OnlyFans subscriptions.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/congress/substantial-evidence-rep-george-santos-broke-law-ethics-panel-finds-rcna125335

He has announced he will not be seeking re-election.

The fact that he’s still in office is just evidence the system is broken. Absolute joke.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 16, 2023, 12:41:35 PM
The fact that he’s still in office is just evidence the system is broken. Absolute joke.

Spending campaign funds on OnlyFans is just...
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on November 16, 2023, 12:46:11 PM
The fact that he’s still in office is just evidence the system is broken. Absolute joke.

The people who can remove him need him there to vote the way they tell him to.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 16, 2023, 06:51:25 PM
Spending campaign funds on OnlyFans is just...
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20231117/6dccfb85827b2dc91146154db30c79b1.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 19, 2023, 10:46:28 AM
Watch the media manufacture consent for Schiff in real time:

https://twitter.com/JeremyBWhite/status/1726097097416720648?t=GXsvkKXMDNQNkiunCJGyIw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on November 19, 2023, 01:24:10 PM
Watch the media manufacture consent for Schiff in real time:

https://twitter.com/JeremyBWhite/status/1726097097416720648?t=GXsvkKXMDNQNkiunCJGyIw&s=19

Really hope we effectively tie the Bills today. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 19, 2023, 05:47:12 PM
I hope the game is shitty enough to excuse me posting this now:

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20231119/d4ba2a5145b001465c9513ec36102f68.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on November 19, 2023, 06:00:36 PM
Oof
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 20, 2023, 10:13:19 AM
Holy excrement
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 24, 2023, 08:58:45 AM
lolfree market

https://twitter.com/MorePerfectUS/status/1727068498197901568?t=-UYE5FZns_xx-W7Y6qpXIw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on November 25, 2023, 07:11:33 PM
Liberal scolds about to go nuclear

https://twitter.com/shadihamid/status/1727742463530447153?t=T2PI72OG0LpgR1Y8Vi5Q8w&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 25, 2023, 07:33:49 PM
Liberal scolds about to go nuclear

https://twitter.com/shadihamid/status/1727742463530447153?t=T2PI72OG0LpgR1Y8Vi5Q8w&s=19

The "kiddo" chick is going to get a second meme life.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on November 25, 2023, 09:14:51 PM
I try to stay out of this portion of the forum because American politics is largely pointless except local elections . Ive never voted Democrat or Republican for president . Been Non Party Affiliate registered since 18 .

My local voting varies on candidate role and stance its usually a mix of R and D and 3rd party.

If the Dems try to weekend at Bernie Biden for another run I will get a spray tan red tie and Maga hat

For sure.  They deserve it since rigging the DNC and forcing Hillary on voters and this would be another laughable offense .
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on November 27, 2023, 04:05:33 PM
https://x.com/jack_raines/status/1729171135827263571?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on November 27, 2023, 04:14:17 PM
https://x.com/jack_raines/status/1729171135827263571?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Rofl

I read that and thought.  3 places I refuse to buy sandwiches at lol .

It's Publix or Jersey Mike's or my local pizza shop . Or I make it myself

Lol
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on November 27, 2023, 04:17:00 PM
https://x.com/jack_raines/status/1729171135827263571?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

There would have been a plan for this!

Also, it's dinner time, please to ask me about cease-fires.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 01, 2023, 08:29:08 AM
This is funny, I can hear the tantrums.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/dick-durbin-judiciary-committee-biden-judges_n_6568fef4e4b066e398b6fb64
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 01, 2023, 10:01:29 AM
Santos expelled.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 01, 2023, 10:13:36 AM
Santos expelled.

At least he still has his Emmy, Nobel Peace Price and Olympic gold medals to comfort him at night.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 01, 2023, 02:18:00 PM
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT8PubCc5/ (https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT8PubCc5/)

You know this guy has a (probably bullshit) tell-all on the way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on December 01, 2023, 02:39:30 PM
https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT8PubCc5/ (https://www.tiktok.com/t/ZT8PubCc5/)

Oh that's delicious
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 02, 2023, 03:58:32 AM
Bernie Sanders’ former staff, delegates, and campaign workers: We came here to ask you to call for a cease fire in Gaza.

Bernie Sanders: These ones right here, officer.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 02, 2023, 07:20:28 PM
Bernie Sanders’ former staff, delegates, and campaign workers: We came here to ask you to call for a cease fire in Gaza.

Bernie Sanders: These ones right here, officer.

I don't get it

Didn't Sanders basically trash Israel for resuming its campaign against Hamas literally today/yesterday ?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 02, 2023, 08:23:05 PM
I don't get it

Didn't Sanders basically trash Israel for resuming its campaign against Hamas literally today/yesterday ?

https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/11/03/palestinian-ceasefire-senate-capitol-dc-israel-gaza-war/

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on December 02, 2023, 10:05:33 PM
https://www.washingtonpost.com/dc-md-va/2023/11/03/palestinian-ceasefire-senate-capitol-dc-israel-gaza-war/



Sounds like an insurrection
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 02, 2023, 10:17:17 PM
Sounds like an insurrection

Lazy
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 04, 2023, 09:26:15 PM
https://x.com/johnfetterman/status/1731786514512671228?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 05, 2023, 07:16:38 AM
https://x.com/johnfetterman/status/1731786514512671228?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

I'm not sure what's more absurd, that Santos would be doing cameos already or that a sitting US Senator would be buying one to harangue his crooked colleague.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 05, 2023, 09:47:04 AM
I'd never heard of Bridget Ziegler before last week, but now I have I really hope there's video.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 05, 2023, 09:49:04 AM
I'd never heard of Bridget Ziegler before last week, but now I have I really hope there's video.

This is the weirded way I have learned about a sexual assault.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 05, 2023, 10:08:25 AM
This is the weirded way I have learned about a sexual assault.

That's not the story I've been reading, this is about a consensual three way involving another woman despite her being vociferously anti gay.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 05, 2023, 10:09:47 AM
That's not the story I've been reading, this is about a consensual three way involving another woman despite her being vociferously anti gay.

https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/christian-ziegler-florida-gop-chairman-allegations-sexual-battery-rcna127430 (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/christian-ziegler-florida-gop-chairman-allegations-sexual-battery-rcna127430)

https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/news/politics/2023/12/04/bridget-ziegler-what-know-about-wife-gop-leader-christian-ziegler-accused-rape/71797886007/ (https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/news/politics/2023/12/04/bridget-ziegler-what-know-about-wife-gop-leader-christian-ziegler-accused-rape/71797886007/)

The assault is alleged to have occurred during said three way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 05, 2023, 10:13:07 AM
https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/christian-ziegler-florida-gop-chairman-allegations-sexual-battery-rcna127430 (https://www.nbcnews.com/politics/politics-news/christian-ziegler-florida-gop-chairman-allegations-sexual-battery-rcna127430)

https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/news/politics/2023/12/04/bridget-ziegler-what-know-about-wife-gop-leader-christian-ziegler-accused-rape/71797886007/ (https://www.heraldtribune.com/story/news/politics/2023/12/04/bridget-ziegler-what-know-about-wife-gop-leader-christian-ziegler-accused-rape/71797886007/)

The assault is alleged to have occurred during said three way.

Way to spoil the fun.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 05, 2023, 10:30:56 AM
Way to spoil the fun.

It's not my fault you stopped reading halfway through 90% of the headlines.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 05, 2023, 11:26:05 AM
It's not my fault you stopped reading halfway through 90% of the headlines.

The husband was the rapey one though, so I think I can still enjoy the thought of the hot gay hating wife eating out another chick without being a wrong 'un.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 05, 2023, 03:31:06 PM
Tubby Tumor has mostly backed down on the military appointments. Now he's only going to refuse to approve the appointment of 4 star generals.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 05, 2023, 05:13:40 PM
It's not my fault you stopped reading halfway through 90% of the headlines.
Twitter-user behavior
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 06, 2023, 12:46:22 PM
https://x.com/JohnHicks00/status/1732438434604597535?s=20
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 06, 2023, 09:29:53 PM
This seems like a jolly good idea, so it obviously won't happen.

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/12/06/realestate/wall-street-housing-market.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 08, 2023, 11:02:46 AM
https://x.com/benyahr/status/1732986613418897849?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

We can not allow this mf to remain relevant but because it is the year 2023 it is absolutely going to happen
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 08, 2023, 11:03:02 AM
This mf said Platterpuss
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 08, 2023, 11:03:12 AM
Shoutout to Arby’s
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 09, 2023, 08:56:24 AM
This is normal

https://twitter.com/abughazalehkat/status/1733302552618217537?t=mOnseBUWS19BmGaSfa01ZA&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 10, 2023, 05:39:00 PM
Minnesota is changing its state flag and asking for submissions from the public. This is unironically the best one I have seen so far.(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20231210/d50a376db395b7847eb5acd393134a93.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 11, 2023, 07:50:04 PM
Healthy laws.

https://twitter.com/AliceOllstein/status/1734372711332274677?t=YlVz7KOUaJoFZ6vrQec0_w&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 14, 2023, 02:46:52 PM
Quote
The President shall not suspend, terminate, denounce, or withdraw the United States from the North Atlantic Treaty, done at Washington, DC, April 4, 1949, except by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, provided that two-thirds of the Senators present concur, or pursuant to an Act of Congress.

https://thehill.com/homenews/4360407-congress-approves-bill-barring-president-withdrawing-nato/

I hope Vladimir kept the receipts, it looks like he might not get what he paid for.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 14, 2023, 03:05:34 PM
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM3Z_Kskl_U (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OM3Z_Kskl_U)

Happy 15 year anniversary. Celebration is compulsory.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 15, 2023, 10:12:06 AM
https://x.com/isaiah_bb/status/1735655284381528432?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Voting is a sham part 1,000,002

(Part 1,000,001 was Kyrsten Sinema)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 15, 2023, 11:12:43 AM
https://x.com/wideofthepost/status/1735661123326611853?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: mj2sexay on December 15, 2023, 02:40:48 PM
LOL wtf maybe Fetterman's not so bad!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 15, 2023, 10:13:42 PM
https://x.com/warclandestine/status/1735869638469173349?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on December 16, 2023, 01:00:28 AM
https://x.com/warclandestine/status/1735869638469173349?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Fantastic.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on December 17, 2023, 08:14:35 AM
He got my vote off this alone

(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20231217/2349deb8155722ea68cff70029e6d256.jpg)(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20231217/0898177e39423ca3f1101cacaefb5203.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 17, 2023, 08:36:30 AM
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattnovak/2023/12/15/viral-images-of-donald-trump-talking-about-deadly-lemonade-are-fake/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Coach K on December 17, 2023, 10:00:11 AM
https://www.forbes.com/sites/mattnovak/2023/12/15/viral-images-of-donald-trump-talking-about-deadly-lemonade-are-fake/
Still voting for anyone other than another round of Biden

The democrats want to rig the DNC then try to force Hillary Clinton and 2 servings of weekend at Biden on us

I'm getting the spray tan and red ties ready


Been registered Non Party Affiliate and have never voted for either major party candidate my entire life

That'll likely change .


Even as a spite vote
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 17, 2023, 10:29:50 AM
LOL wtf maybe Fetterman's not so bad!
Glad his support of genocide turned you around.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 21, 2023, 09:13:16 AM
https://x.com/vodkasnowflake/status/1737651887015629167?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 22, 2023, 12:27:13 PM
https://x.com/unusual_whales/status/1738236007881769224?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

That’s politics, bitch
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 22, 2023, 01:06:18 PM
https://x.com/unusual_whales/status/1738236007881769224?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

That’s politics, bitch

They legislate all companies. The issue is not this trade, it's that politicians are allowed to trade at all.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 22, 2023, 01:56:32 PM
Police are now in possession of a second video of the hot anti-gay Florida woman being, in fact, very gay. This excrement had better leak.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: guinness77 on December 22, 2023, 03:06:54 PM
Police are now in possession of a second video of the hot anti-gay Florida woman being, in fact, very gay. This excrement had better leak.
Who are you talking about?

Asking for a friend, of course. 
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on December 22, 2023, 03:22:59 PM
Who are you talking about?

Asking for a friend, of course. 

https://themessenger.com/politics/founder-of-anti-lgbt-moms-for-liberty-filmed-sex-tape-with-other-woman-report
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on December 27, 2023, 09:31:50 PM
https://x.com/meidastouch/status/1740184541170741363?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on December 29, 2023, 08:27:25 AM
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/12/29/2023-worst-political-predictions-00132568

People always forget about stuff like this, fun to look back at.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on December 29, 2023, 02:36:37 PM
https://www.politico.com/news/magazine/2023/12/29/2023-worst-political-predictions-00132568

People always forget about stuff like this, fun to look back at.
“Civil war will break out in the U.S.,” Medvedev wrote. California and Texas will become “independent states as a result."

Dude inspired that movie
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2024, 12:27:49 PM
Better 1 or 2?

https://twitter.com/PinstripeBungle/status/1743666838532190242?s=20 (https://twitter.com/PinstripeBungle/status/1743666838532190242?s=20)

https://twitter.com/3YearLetterman/status/1743650267923423615?s=20 (https://twitter.com/3YearLetterman/status/1743650267923423615?s=20)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 06, 2024, 01:25:14 PM
https://x.com/bencjacobs/status/1743326793266835628?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2024, 01:29:13 PM
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/amp/rcna132626

Happy anniversary!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2024, 02:16:01 PM
https://x.com/bencjacobs/status/1743326793266835628?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

freaking grifter.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2024, 02:39:14 PM
freaking grifter.

Is he? He represents working class Pennsylvania; he's pro union, pro gun control, pro healthcare, pro individual rights, anti corporation, which seems to be entirely in tune with his constituency. He's in many ways more left wing than many of his Democratic colleagues and in others far less progressive, and I think he's always been that way. It feels to me a bit like many left wing voters tried to believe he is what they wanted him to be, and now he's in the Senate and continuing to be who he has always been they're upset that he isn't falling in line with what they think should be his position.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2024, 02:46:54 PM
Is he? He represents working class Pennsylvania; he's pro union, pro gun control, pro healthcare, pro individual rights, anti corporation, which seems to be entirely in tune with his constituency. He's in many ways more left wing than many of his Democratic colleagues and in others far less progressive, and I think he's always been that way. It feels to me a bit like many left wing voters tried to believe he is what they wanted him to be, and now he's in the Senate and continuing to be who he has always been they're upset that he isn't falling in line with what they think should be his position.

Ran his entire campaign as "I'm totally a progressive"

The last two months: I'm so not a progressive, you guys!

He's flipped his stance from his campaign to now on several issues. The evidence is in this thread .feel free to read back.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2024, 03:15:57 PM
Ran his entire campaign as "I'm totally a progressive"

The last two months: I'm so not a progressive, you guys!

He's flipped his stance from his campaign to now on several issues. The evidence is in this thread .feel free to read back.

I think that depends very much on how you define "progressive". He built his reputation on his role as mayor in the rejuvenation of a dead industrial town, including working as a mediator alongside the town police to de-escalate situations and prevent arrests, and using his mayoral office to conduct same sex marriages despite it being illegal in Pennsylvania. Those are key tenets of what is generally considered a progressive position in the modern political world. He also stopped a black kid at gunpoint because he suspected him of committing a crime, which is a decidedly unprogressive action.

I don't think it's contradictory to think that he might look at some of the positions that modern progressives are taking and say "that's not who I am" - I like to think I'm fairly progressive and I do that too - while still considering him to be true to who he always was. The fact that you and others don't like some of the things he says and is is entirely reasonable, but I think he is pretty honest. He wasn't a polished political operator before his stroke and he definitely isn't now, but I respect his willingness to say what he thinks rather than what is most politically expedient to say.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2024, 03:19:41 PM
I think that depends very much on how you define "progressive". He built his reputation on his role as mayor in the rejuvenation of a dead industrial town, including working as a mediator alongside the town police to de-escalate situations and prevent arrests, and using his mayoral office to conduct same sex marriages despite it being illegal in Pennsylvania. Those are key tenets of what is generally considered a progressive position in the modern political world. He also stopped a black kid at gunpoint because he suspected him of committing a crime, which is a decidedly unprogressive action.

I don't think it's contradictory to think that he might look at some of the positions that modern progressives are taking and say "that's not who I am" - I like to think I'm fairly progressive and I do that too - while still considering him to be true to who he always was. The fact that you and others don't like some of the things he says and is is entirely reasonable, but I think he is pretty honest. He wasn't a polished political operator before his stroke and he definitely isn't now, but I respect his willingness to say what he thinks rather than what is most politically expedient to say.

No.

He doesn't have to not believe in liberal politics to not be a grifter.

He ran as someone who called himself a progressive and aligned his campaign with Bernie Sanders' politics. Now that he is in office, he has actively declared himself as an opponent to progressive politics and is using this language.

He sold himself as a progressive to win that section of the electorate and he is now moving away from it. The dude is a centrist lib who played the left wing of the party.

But please keep telling yourself that there is a world where a progressive would use the word pinko.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2024, 05:26:02 PM
I think that depends very much on how you define "progressive". He built his reputation on his role as mayor in the rejuvenation of a dead industrial town, including working as a mediator alongside the town police to de-escalate situations and prevent arrests, and using his mayoral office to conduct same sex marriages despite it being illegal in Pennsylvania. Those are key tenets of what is generally considered a progressive position in the modern political world. He also stopped a black kid at gunpoint because he suspected him of committing a crime, which is a decidedly unprogressive action.

I don't think it's contradictory to think that he might look at some of the positions that modern progressives are taking and say "that's not who I am" - I like to think I'm fairly progressive and I do that too - while still considering him to be true to who he always was. The fact that you and others don't like some of the things he says and is is entirely reasonable, but I think he is pretty honest. He wasn't a polished political operator before his stroke and he definitely isn't now, but I respect his willingness to say what he thinks rather than what is most politically expedient to say.
He's spent the last couple months vigorously defending Israel's right to commit genocide. He's cooked.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on January 06, 2024, 06:25:50 PM
He's spent the last couple months vigorously defending Israel's right to commit genocide. He's cooked.

no way the twitter schizoposters will vote for him now, he's done for
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 06, 2024, 09:24:31 PM
no way the twitter schizoposters will vote for him now, he's done for

My work here is done, psyop complete
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 06, 2024, 09:47:22 PM
He's spent the last couple months vigorously defending Israel's right to commit genocide. He's cooked.
Cooked how? I doubt his constituency really cares that much about a proxy wsr halfway around the world.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 06, 2024, 09:50:17 PM
Cooked how? I doubt his constituency really cares that much about a proxy wsr halfway around the world.
What do you think his consistency is?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on January 06, 2024, 10:20:23 PM
Cooked how? I doubt his constituency really cares that much about a proxy wsr halfway around the world.
What does he gain by repeatedly publicly supporting the worst of it?

I know it doesn't matter to you how good a Democrat is because they aren't a Republican.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 08, 2024, 08:32:13 AM
https://x.com/quiverquant/status/1743664362399625267?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 08, 2024, 09:25:01 AM
That won't pass but good for him.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on January 08, 2024, 09:38:58 AM
That won't pass but good for him.

Voltron!!
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 08, 2024, 11:17:14 AM
Socialism! (https://www.newsweek.com/florida-considers-socialist-model-insurance-costs-1858612)

I was told that markets would find solutions, why are voters standing for this abuse of taxes?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Jumbo on January 13, 2024, 11:28:58 PM
https://twitter.com/JoshKraushaar/status/1745166918061785173

Looks like Fetterman is cooked
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 29, 2024, 04:14:10 PM
https://x.com/halalflow/status/1752021755995025689?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Lmfao
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on January 29, 2024, 04:15:13 PM
https://twitter.com/JoshKraushaar/status/1745166918061785173

Looks like Fetterman is cooked

https://x.com/goodvibepolitik/status/1751064079286878248?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 29, 2024, 04:22:53 PM
https://x.com/halalflow/status/1752021755995025689?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Lmfao

https://x.com/goodvibepolitik/status/1751064079286878248?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

What an evil queynte.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 30, 2024, 10:20:32 AM
https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1752354747137368083?s=20 (https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1752354747137368083?s=20)

Oh whoops.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on January 30, 2024, 11:04:35 AM
https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1752354747137368083?s=20 (https://twitter.com/JakeSherman/status/1752354747137368083?s=20)

Oh whoops.

Apparently she used campaign funds to pay her husband for security services, and he doesn't have a security license.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on January 30, 2024, 12:57:19 PM
Apparently she used campaign funds to pay her husband for security services, and he doesn't have a security license.

What a smart move. What a smart, totally logical move
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 13, 2024, 11:45:20 AM
From the special election to replace Santos

https://twitter.com/daveweigel/status/1757460431994572953?t=2MzqDKz53jdn_L81BO6hPQ&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 14, 2024, 02:59:42 PM
I love polls

https://twitter.com/jdcmedlock/status/1757840463426695189?t=q4CpQJc9Zj57a1kT_lxCtw&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 14, 2024, 06:52:36 PM
Launch the nukes, Xi

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4468099-democrats-unveil-new-congressional-hip-hop-task-force/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 14, 2024, 07:22:15 PM
Launch the nukes, Xi

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4468099-democrats-unveil-new-congressional-hip-hop-task-force/

They missed their opportunity to make it bipartisan and include a seminal force in the world of hip hop and a founding member of Run DMC, George Santos.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 14, 2024, 07:26:39 PM
They missed their opportunity to make it bipartisan and include a seminal force in the world of hip hop and a founding member of Run DMC, George Santos.
I liked this joke.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: bojanglesman on February 14, 2024, 07:50:18 PM
Launch the nukes, Xi

https://thehill.com/homenews/house/4468099-democrats-unveil-new-congressional-hip-hop-task-force/

(https://c.tenor.com/n8DB4bmpduIAAAAC/tenor.gif)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on February 14, 2024, 10:16:41 PM
America, it's time to get Savage.

(https://i.redd.it/jslumyocelic1.jpeg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on February 15, 2024, 06:20:09 AM
America, it's time to get Savage.

(https://i.redd.it/jslumyocelic1.jpeg)

I remember IJR telling me Ben Savage was one of the smarmiest cunts he's ever crossed paths with when they were at Stanford together. 


Born to be a politician.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 15, 2024, 08:21:20 AM
In today's instalment of "Republican politicians inadvertently saying the things out loud that should stay in their heads":

https://twitter.com/SamNewton/status/1755597294911828426
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 22, 2024, 07:32:41 PM
Jack Posobiec speaking at CPAC:

https://www.youtube.com/shorts/AI6SP70Zprs

"It was a joke bro"
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 23, 2024, 02:52:18 PM
7-2 majority coming up

https://twitter.com/mtredden/status/1761116734990274783?t=emtNFZbp_SL4mP3HT9RXqg&s=19
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on February 24, 2024, 07:21:30 PM
But the Democrats are the real fascists!

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/nazis-mingle-openly-cpac-spreading-antisemitic-conspiracy-theories-fin-rcna140335
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on February 24, 2024, 09:27:44 PM
But the Democrats are the real fascists!

https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/nazis-mingle-openly-cpac-spreading-antisemitic-conspiracy-theories-fin-rcna140335

With all the people on the left chanting to gas all the jews you'd think they'd all have Biden/Harris stickers on
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: reuben on February 24, 2024, 09:44:25 PM
(https://i.redd.it/oj33fzvnymkc1.jpeg)

Sell the team, you queynte.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on February 24, 2024, 10:16:12 PM
(https://i.redd.it/oj33fzvnymkc1.jpeg)

Sell the team, you queynte.
Either that or succumb to that severe case of old.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 25, 2024, 01:14:07 PM
 
With all the people on the left chanting to gas all the jews you'd think they'd all have Biden/Harris stickers on
(https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240225/5a1ec5cf541f1dc3c8e8ef6a5c7ea75c.jpg)
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 28, 2024, 08:31:00 AM
https://x.com/krystalball/status/1762664068727415088?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on February 28, 2024, 08:31:31 AM
  (https://uploads.tapatalk-cdn.com/20240225/5a1ec5cf541f1dc3c8e8ef6a5c7ea75c.jpg)

Damn I’ve had this pic in the camera roll just waiting for the perfect opportunity to use it and I missed
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on February 29, 2024, 07:21:04 PM
Another continuing resolution until March 8. Republicans will continue to claim government services don't work while actively ensuring it.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 04, 2024, 06:05:19 PM
https://x.com/tresdessert/status/1764567774364409950?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 04, 2024, 06:20:12 PM
https://x.com/tresdessert/status/1764567774364409950?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

Tweet deleted?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 06, 2024, 06:09:48 AM
Adam Schiff? California sucks
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 06, 2024, 06:32:41 AM
"I can't vote for Biden because he genocide too much"

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-israel-finish-problem-gaza-1234981038/

https://www.thedailybeast.com/biden-administrations-going-all-in-on-push-for-gaza-ceasefire
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 06, 2024, 01:09:40 PM
"I can't vote for Biden because he genocide too much"

https://www.rollingstone.com/politics/politics-news/trump-israel-finish-problem-gaza-1234981038/

https://www.thedailybeast.com/biden-administrations-going-all-in-on-push-for-gaza-ceasefire

Do you think he arrived at this policy decision on his own volition, void of any external pressure?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 06, 2024, 01:35:31 PM
Do you think he arrived at this policy decision on his own volition, void of any external pressure?

I think that he probably arrived at it based upon a whackton of information and guidance from his administration, which in turn is trying to manage an absolutely impossible situation in which large portions of the American population directly represent the populace involved in one side of the conflict or the other and passionately believe that the other side is the one doing the illegal murdering, while also contending with decades of direct and indirect US government and corporate involvement in the whole situation.

I also think that people squealing about Biden being guilty of genocide are operating at a grade 10 level of political reason and awareness in which everything is black and white, and that they should probably exercise a little more adult reasoning. The expectation or even desire that a government would operate on such a basic level of "side A good, side B bad, support side A" is to be charitable incredibly naive. I suspect the Venn diagram of those people and the "all parties are the same" people has a scarily large overlap and the massive awakening that they're flirting with in November seems to be eluding them. The next Trump administration isn't going to be anything like the first one and I don't mean that in a positive way.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 06, 2024, 03:08:47 PM
I think that he probably arrived at it based upon a whackton of information and guidance from his administration, which in turn is trying to manage an absolutely impossible situation in which large portions of the American population directly represent the populace involved in one side of the conflict or the other and passionately believe that the other side is the one doing the illegal murdering, while also contending with decades of direct and indirect US government and corporate involvement in the whole situation.

I also think that people squealing about Biden being guilty of genocide are operating at a grade 10 level of political reason and awareness in which everything is black and white, and that they should probably exercise a little more adult reasoning. The expectation or even desire that a government would operate on such a basic level of "side A good, side B bad, support side A" is to be charitable incredibly naive. I suspect the Venn diagram of those people and the "all parties are the same" people has a scarily large overlap and the massive awakening that they're flirting with in November seems to be eluding them. The next Trump administration isn't going to be anything like the first one and I don't mean that in a positive way.

My biggest takeaway from this is that you think the US voter concerns are pointless rabble to be cowed.

Thinking that the black and Arab voices who are leading the protest of Joe Biden's nomination over his support of Israel's military operation as a way of forcing a policy change and/or a better candidate on the ballot are so naive as to not know what is at stake for them if Trump wins in 2024 is so condescending that it's almost unfathomable.

It's amazing how many people will hear criticism of the Democratic Party's strategy for the past three elections of "vote for us or democracy is over!" and will defend it without not even blinking at the irony.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 06, 2024, 03:09:35 PM
Republican voters, everyone.

https://thehill.com/homenews/state-watch/4511725-uvalde-texas-law-enforcement-officers-win-primaries/
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 06, 2024, 08:20:39 PM
Even by Republican standards this one's a doozy.

https://www.huffpost.com/entry/north-carolina-gop-mark-robinson-women-vote_n_65e7d899e4b0f9d26cacc002?hlo
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 09, 2024, 11:14:01 AM
https://www.nola.com/news/politics/legislature/jeff-landry-signs-bill-to-expand-louisiana-death-penalty/article_9b33b116-da5d-11ee-a325-3f26b93ed77e.html
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 11, 2024, 09:56:47 AM
https://x.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1767198788689465639?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 12, 2024, 04:30:46 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/12/us/politics/rfk-jr-aaron-rodgers-jesse-ventura.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Sure, that might as well happen.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: MBGreen on March 12, 2024, 05:32:46 PM
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/12/us/politics/rfk-jr-aaron-rodgers-jesse-ventura.html?smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

Sure, that might as well happen.
"This team needs to eliminate distractions"

-Aaron Rodgers
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 12, 2024, 08:46:36 PM
https://twitter.com/CharlesRobinson/status/1767670913267368035?s=20

There. That's both threads.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 13, 2024, 12:31:12 PM
https://x.com/jburnmurdoch/status/1767198788689465639?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg
This was a good thread
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 13, 2024, 12:32:20 PM
The House overwhelmingly voting to ban TikTok is one of the stupidest congressional things in recent memory.

About 65 House reps max aren't dumb as excrement.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 13, 2024, 12:37:32 PM
The House overwhelmingly voting to ban TikTok is one of the stupidest congressional things in recent memory.

About 65 House reps max aren't dumb as excrement.

I'm not familiar with every permutation of the bill being floated, but my understanding is having China divest of Tik Tok is whats the end goal.

If it was an outright ban of Tiktok because "social media bad" that's one thing

But here it seems to be more about China having access to a wealth of information via the app

I think that's at least a fair discussion
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 13, 2024, 06:47:07 PM


I'm not familiar with every permutation of the bill being floated, but my understanding is having China divest of Tik Tok is whats the end goal.

If it was an outright ban of Tiktok because "social media bad" that's one thing

But here it seems to be more about China having access to a wealth of information via the app

I think that's at least a fair discussion

The US government's access to Meta, Twitter, Google, Apple user info is much more impactful on the lives of Americans. Someone in China having access to your metadata is a big fat zero.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Badger on March 13, 2024, 07:06:12 PM
Tom Cotton's line of questioning with TikTok's CEO perfectly encapsulates the situation.

https://www.cnn.com/videos/politics/2024/02/02/tom-cotton-shou-zi-chew-singaporean-tiktok-testimony-vpx.cnn

ARE YEW CHI-NEEEESE?

Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 13, 2024, 09:15:36 PM

The US government's access to Meta, Twitter, Google, Apple user info is much more impactful on the lives of Americans. Someone in China having access to your metadata is a big fat zero.

Surely you can understand why US politicians don't care about them having access to your metadata

Regardless its not unreasonable to for the government to have a discussion about how much American data foreign countries should have
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: CatoTheElder on March 14, 2024, 07:51:54 AM
I don't feel any safer with the metadata being in the hands of a US owned company when all of the current US owned companies sell it off to anyone they please, anyway.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 22, 2024, 10:30:21 PM
On modern Christianity, the Republican Party, and Donald J Trump specifically:

https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2024/march-web-only/ned-flanders-douglas-wilson-russell-moore-character.html?s=07

An excellent piece, whether you have are a believer or not.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 23, 2024, 01:07:10 PM
On modern Christianity, the Republican Party, and Donald J Trump specifically:

https://www.christianitytoday.com/ct/2024/march-web-only/ned-flanders-douglas-wilson-russell-moore-character.html?s=07

An excellent piece, whether you have are a believer or not.

The guy has points, but this article isn't primarily about Trump and Republicans. It's a religious nut who wants America to move wayyyy to the right

I suspect that he wants more people like Billy Graham and Mike Pence. He's a believer in complimentarianism which my understanding is essentially just religious sexism that believes men and women are equal but different, so women should stick to what they're good at which is making babies

On character the guys correct (although unrealistic, this is someone who would advocate for things like the outright ban on pornography and abortion) so I'm not sure what you like.

Is it because he's critical of Trump, that you outright ignore his insanely whackado religious beliefs?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Johnny English on March 23, 2024, 01:22:58 PM
The guy has points, but this article isn't primarily about Trump and Republicans. It's a religious nut who wants America to move wayyyy to the right

I suspect that he wants more people like Billy Graham and Mike Pence. He's a believer in complimentarianism which my understanding is essentially just religious sexism that believes men and women are equal but different, so women should stick to what they're good at which is making babies

On character the guys correct (although unrealistic, this is someone who would advocate for things like the outright ban on pornography and abortion) so I'm not sure what you like.

Is it because he's critical of Trump, that you outright ignore his insanely whackado religious beliefs?

While he clearly has some views with which I don't agree, I don't think there's anything "insanely whackadoo" going on there. Beyond that particularly subjective issue, I don't have a problem with people holding religious beliefs - we are all entitled to our own belief systems. I have an issue with religious beliefs forming a basis for public policy which clearly the writer doesn't, but that isn't really the point of the article, is it?
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: Derek Smalls on March 23, 2024, 02:33:34 PM
As someone who went to catholic school for a while, I thought that was an interesting way to look at it. There were a couple teachers that came off like Flanders. But now many of the so-called religious ones are more like the caricature in the article.
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: SixFeetDeep on March 26, 2024, 11:53:21 AM
https://x.com/jeremiahdjohns/status/1772465334445899811?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

acc
Title: Re: U.S. Politics
Post by: dcm1602 on March 26, 2024, 01:33:13 PM
https://x.com/jeremiahdjohns/status/1772465334445899811?s=46&t=e6vm1ybQ4I7pEpNpNEkBkg

acc

Shapiro is incredibly hawkish on Gaza. But the dude is also a Jewish man who was in Israel the weekend of October 7th for Yom Kipur

So I'd say that's pretty justifiable

Also didn't realize Zach Wilson had an evil alter ego in this Fuentes guy